LAWN TENNIS 



/ 



IN 



OUR OWN COUNTRY 



BY 



H. W. SLOCUM JR. 



- "^^ 




PUBLISHED BY 



A. G. SPALDING & BROS. 



NEW YORK - PHILADELPHIA - CHICAGO 



\ 






Copyrighted 1890 

by 

A. G. SPAIvDING & BROS. 



PRESS OF 

ROGERS & SHERWOOD 

21 AND 23 BARCLAY STREET 

NEW YORK 



CONTENTS. 



PART I. 

THE GAME AS IT IS PI^AYED. 

CHAPTER. PAGE. 

I. The Court and Equipments of the Game, . . 7 

II. The Service, 17 

III. The Stroke, .31 

IV. The Single Game, 49 

V. Hints to Young Beginners, 61 

VI. The Double Game, . , . . . ,77 

VII. Lawn Tennis as a Game for Women, . . .89 

PART 11. 

THE GAME AS IT HAS BEEN PI,AYED. 
I. The Introduction and Early History of the Game, 105 
II. The Championships of the U. S. N. L. T. A., 

Singles, iiS 

III. The Championships of the U. S. N. L. T. A., 

Doubles, 157 

IV. Our Players Abroad, 176 

V. The Inter-Collegiate Association, . . . 190 
VI. The Sectional Championships, .... 205 

APPENDIX. 

Xaws of Lawn Tennis 208 

Of&cers and Members of the National Association, . 216 

All-England Championships, 221 

Rules for Handicapping, 222 

The BagnaH-Wild System of Drawing, .... 224 



PART I. 

THE GAME AS IT IS PLAYED, 




CHAPTER L 

THE COURT AND EQUIPMENTS OF THE 
GAME. 

"But this the tennis court keeper knows better than I." 

— Ki7ig Henry IV., 

^^/ HKN I^awn Tennis was first played in Eng- 
land, some years before its introduction in 
this country, it differed from the game of to-day 
mainly in the dimensions of the court and net, 
and the shape or construction of the implements 
used in plajdng. If we are to believe what we 
read, it was the crude invention of an English 
officer, who, in all probability, was seeking for a 
game which would not only satisfy the English 
love of manly sport, but also afford an easy 
medium of exercise for himself and one or two of 
his friends. If we had no knowledge on the point 
we should be quite safe in assuming that the idea was 
in part suggested by the simple game of Battledore 
and Shuttlecock, for under the rules formulated by 
Major Wingfield, Eawn Tennis was played over a 
net many feet higher than those in use at the present 



time, and as, in addition, the lightest and crudest 
kind of a racket and balls were used, the contestants 
must have been sufficiently elated when they suc- 
ceeded in striking the ball fairly and raising it over 
the many feet of net, without devoting much thought 
as to the point of the hostile court in which it should 
fall, or, in other words, without any idea of ' 'placing' ' 
the ball, which is so prominent a feature of the 
present game. Indeed, it is difficult to conceive how 
it would be possible to "place " the ball over a net 
five or six feet high, being given a court of the present 
dimensions, and 3^et we read that the court of those 
days was even smaller ; so that while we may be 
under obligations to Major Wingfield for the idea, 
we are indebted only to the genius of the times and 
a sport-loving generation for the evolution and per- 
fection of the idea, the modern and beautiful game 
with its low net, swift and scientific strokes and ac- 
curate ' ' placing. ' ' No game has developed or im- 
proved more than lyawn Tennis during the past few 
years, and that fact is an almost unerring indication 
that the game has come to stay. I can recall no great 
and popular pastime of modern days, except Cricket, 
which has not been materiall)^ changed for the better 
within the last decade or two. Baseball and the 
Rugby game of Football, as now played by our 
colleges, are notable instances of this proposition. 
The most substantial proof of the real merit of these 
two games lies in the fact that there was so much in 
them to be brought out in recent years, and some of 
us might be inclined to differ from the judgment of an 
Bnglishman or an American admirer of Cricket, who 
would aver that the only reason wh)^ that game has 
not changed, is because it was perfect in its beginning. 



— 9 — 

An}^ changes in Lawn Tennis, which the future 
may bring about, will probably be changes in the 
game itself and not in the court, upon which, or the 
implements with which, the game is played. There 
is every reason to believe that a court of 78 feet in 
length and 27 feet in width, and a net 3 feet high, 
present the best combination possible to induce 
speedy play and accurate placing. The first of the 
Laws of Lawn Tennis, as adopted by the United 
States National Lawn Tennis Association, specifies 
the dimensions of the court and height of the net 
as follows : 

THE COURT. 

I. The Court is 78 feet long, and 27 feet wide. It is 
divided across the middle by a net, the ends of which are 
attached to two posts, A and B, standing 3 feet outside 
the court on either side. The height of the net is 3 feet 



G 


1 
N 


5 




L 


E 


18 






21 




18 


21 




F 


IV 

3 


1 

5 


K 




\ 
3 


< 

9 


D 



6 inches at the posts, and 3 feet in the middle. At each 
end of the court, parallel with the net, and 39 feet from it, 
are drawn the base lines DE and FG, the ends of which 
are connected by the side-lines DF and EG. Half-way 
between the side-lines, and parallel with them, is drawn the 
half co'urt line IH, dividing the space on each side of the 
net into two equal parts, the right and left courts. On each 



— 10 • 



side of the net, at a distance of 21 feet from it, and parallel 
with it, are drawn the service lines KL and MN. 

The above diagram shows the court when it is to 
be used for the Single or Single-handed game. 
When three or four persons are to play, the game 
being then called the Double or Four-handed game, 
additional space is added to each side of the court 
as it is used in the Single-handed game, but the base 
line remains at the same distance from the net and 
the service court is the same in every dimension. 
The followinsr dia2:ram shows the court for 



THE THREE-HANDED AND 
GAMES 



FOUR-HANDED 



i^6 



side Line, 



"S feet. 



Elne. 42.f eet. 



The only difference, therefore, between the Single 
and Double courts, is a difference in width, both being 
parallelograms, the former 78 feet in length, and 27 
feet in width, and the latter 78 feet in length and 36 
feet in width. 

When a I^awn Tennis Club is first organized, the 
question as to whether turf or earth courts shall be 



— 11 — 

constructed, often causes much discussion. It is a 
matter of some consideration, for a Club, inasmuch, 
as it frequentl}^ happens that its membership is 
largely influenced by the kind of court which is 
adopted. A great number of the most expert 
pla3'ers object to practice on earth courts, on the 
ground that such practice injures their pla}^ on turf, 
and it is well known that a majority of the great 
tournaments, which are so pleasant a feature of the 
game, are contested on turf. Then again, one who 
is to construct a court for private use, will often 
hesitate in his selection on account of a lack of 
knowledge as to the relative cost, expense of main- 
taining, durabilit}^, etc. , of the turf and earth courts. 
If I were compelled to choose for mj^self, and there 
were no unusual circumstances to influence my 
decision, I should unhesitatingl}^ choose a turf 
court. It is probable, however, that there are always 
certain conditions, peculiar to any particular Club 
or individual, which are largely influential in de- 
termining its or his choice, and it is in view of that 
fact that I have prepared the following list of 
considerations : 

I. In the case of a Club which numbers among 
its members many expert players, it is well to have 
turf courts, as nine out of ten experts prefer them. 
It may be said that a Club cannot cater to a small 
class, but it must be remembered that the presence 
of the most skilled pla3^ers does much for the mem- 
bership and general prosperity of a Club. 

II. A turf court is undoubtedly more expensive, 
everything considered, than one of dirt or clay. A 
poor turf court is about as bad as none at all, and 
one, to be kept in good condition, requires constant 



— 13 — 

supervision and care. The original cost of construc- 
~tion is perhaps less for a first-class turf court than 
one of dirt or clay, but after construction the latter 
requires much less attention. A consideration 
against the clay court, however, lies in the fact that 
a mixture of dirt and clay is very apt to seam or 
crack in the early spring, when the frost is leaving 
the ground. It is a matter of considerable expense 
to remedy such an evil, which will ordinarily be 
averted by carefully covering the court with boards 
and straw during the winter months. 

III. A court of dirt or clay may be used much 
earlier in the spring and much sooner after a heavy 
rain than one of turf 

IV. In places where- the soil is apt to be moist 
or damp, and particularly within a short distance of 
the sea-shore, a dirt or clay court is preferable, for if 
turf is used, the balls become wet and soggy and 
unfit for play. 

V. A turf court is much cleaner and more com- 
fortable to play upon than one of dirt, and the game, 
when played upon turf, is undoubtedly more pic- 
turesque and attractive for the spectator. 

VI. As a rule, balls which are used on a turf 
court suffer less wear and tear, and therefore last 
longer than those which are used on dirt or clay 
courts. 

In laying out a court it should be remembered that 
a large amount of space is required outside of the 
lines, for the ball is frequently returned so that its 
bound carries it some distance outside of the base or 
side lines. In the summer of 1889, while playing in 
the championship match at Newport, I made an 
energetic attempt to return a ball and ran at full 



speed into an umpire who was seated at least twenty 
feet back of the base line ; so it is probably not too 
much to provide a space of at least twenty feet, or 
twenty-five, if possible, back of the base line, and at 
least ten feet along the side-lines. There is nothing 
more anno^dng to a player than to be hampered in 
his movements by lack of space. Kven an old and 
experienced contestant in tournaments will become 
nervous when the line of spectators approaches too 
close to the court. 

Some care should be exercised in the selection of 
a net and poles. Cheap nets are plentiful and easy 
to buy, but the purchaser will not be pleased with 
his economy when he finds at the first time of using 
that a ball will pass through the net almost as easily 
as through the air. It pays to purchase an expensive 
net, made of the strongest material. The top of the 
net should be bounded by a band of pure white 
canvas or other strong material, from three to five 
inches in width, so that the player may have the best 
possible view of the top of the net and direct his 
strokes accordingly, for the closer to the top of the 
net the ball passes, the more skillful is the stroke 
considered to be. In regard to the poles, the most 
convenient style and perhaps the best in all respects 
is that known as the Taylor Pole, or any other which 
is constructed on similar principles. The particular 
style known as the Taylor Pole consists of a pointed 
iron socket, which is driven into the ground so that 
the mouth of the socket is flush with the surface, and 
a pole, which is made to fit rather loosely in the 
socket, and is therefore easily turned in either direc- 
tion by two handles placed near the top. As the 
pole is turned to the right or left, the net rope or 



— 14 — 

-wire is wound or unwound around the pole, and the 
net is thus easily tightened or loosened. The arrange- 
ment is simple, and the only objections which can be 
urged against it are : first, that the socket makes a 
rather large hole in the ground, and second, that the 
handles on the pole may intercept the ball in play, 
something which has occurred but once in my own 
experience. 

The Racket and Ball are of course important 
equipments of the game. The Laws of I^awn Tennis 
require that the ball shall measure not less than 2if 
inches and not more than 2^ inches in diameter, 
and that they shall weigh not less than i [| ounces, 
and not more than two ounces. An experienced 
player will detect any material deviation, either in 
measurement or weight, from the figures as laid 
down in the lyaws. The United States National 
Lawn Tennis Association annually adopts, as the 
ofiicial ball, that one which the majority of its mem- 
bers considers the best in the market, and the public 
has a very fair guide in the opinion of so many ex- 
pert players. 
[ ' As for the racket, it is not at all a difficult task to 
select a good one, for all now manufactured are of 
about the same shape, and one excels another only 
in the quality of gut used in stringing or of the wood 
from which the frame is constructed. It would seem 
as if common sense should have dictated the adop- 
tion of the present style from the beginning of the 
game, but, on the contrary, the head of the racket 
sufifered many curious and foolish changes before it 
took the form of the present popular shape. 

The accompanying cut. No. i, shows the old- 
fashioned racket with its curved head. I remember 



lo- 




using one of them as late as 1S82. It was followed in 
this country b}^ man}'- new and curious shapes, until 
finall}^ the famous English racket, 
.made b}- Tate, was much used by our 
[best players, and the American manu- 
facturers saw the necessity of introduc- 
ing something similar to it. The result 
is shown in cut No. 2, which is the 
racket now in universal use, and there 
is no reason to believe that there will 
be any further change of consequence, 
as the present shape is the correct 
one from a common sense as well as 
No! I. scientific point of view. In regard to 
weight, a man of ordinary strength should use a 
racket weighing from is}4 to 14^^ ounces. In no 
case should one heavier than 15 ounces be used, for 
the lighter weights are suf&cient to drive the ball 
with power and force, and any extra 
weight is onl}'- a handicap and a disad- 
vantage. 

' ' The Beekman, " " The Sears, " " The 
Slocum," and " The Association," are 
all good rackets of American make, well 
constructed, finely strung, and of the 
approved shape. I have no doubt that 
other good rackets are made in this 
country, but those which I have men- 
tioned are most commonly used by ex- 
pert players. All of them are imitations 
of the English "Tate," it is true, but 
they are so nearlj^, if not quite, equal 
to the English article, that a purchaser will not suffer 
l)y encouraging the home industry. 




No. 2. 








l:,verse Overhand Service. 




CHAPTER II. 



THE SERVICE 



"What services canst thou do?" 

— King Lear. 

"The service is not service, so being done." 

— Cyuibeline. 

T HAVE selected the Service for the contents of 
-^ this chapter, inasmuch as the server begins 
hostilities in every game, and the subject naturally 
occurs to the mind as the first to be discussed. It is 
not proposed, however, to here treat of the advisa- 
1)ility of a swift or slow service, the proper method 
of receiving, and other kindred points. All these 
are reserved for later discussion, and the purpose of 
the present chapter is simply to show the various 
methods of serving, the proper disposition of the 
different parts of the bod}^ while in the act of serving, 
and the relative positions of the racket and ball. 
The bare statement of an individual opinion does 
not entirely fulfill such a purpose, and I shall there- 
fore illustrate my meaning by the use of the accom- 



18 — 



panying cuts, all of which are taken from instantane- 
ous photographs of expert players — players who are 
generally' considered to make the different services 
*«l and strokes according to 
the best methods. 

At the same time, it must 
be understood that it is 
extremely difficult to se- 
cure instantaneous photo- 
graphs which represent 
the services and strokes 
with exactness. As the 
racket moves through the 
air, it reaches a certain 
position, which, if photo- 
graphed, presents a very 
fair idea of an}- particular 
service or stroke. If the 
photographer is alert and 
catches that position, well 
and good ; but if there be 
a dela}- of even a small 
fraction of a second, the 
racket sweeps 
on in its 
course and 
the picture is 
without value 
to show the 
various char- 
acteristics of the desired stroke. The difficulty is 
particularl}^ great in the case of a swift overhand 
service or a smash, in which the racket passes 
through the air at a tremendous rate of speed. 




Overhand Service. 



— lo- 
in the overhand service, for instance, the racket 
and ball meet over the head of the server, but 
a photograph, which is taken the smallest fraction 
of a second after the meeting, shows the head of the 
racket within one or two feet of the ground, and 
convej'S absoluteh- no idea of an overhand service. 

But while some of the cuts are not entireh' satis- 
factory, for the reasons stated, others are very nearly 
perfect. It is seldom that the ball can be caught, 
but in some of the illustrations of the service, it will 
be seen that the ball is clearly and .sharply defined. 
In other cases I shall endeavor to supply the de- 
ficienc^^ 

Perhaps I should add, in deference to the feelings 
of the players who were the subjects of these photo- 
graphs, that little or no effort has been made to pre- 
serve a likeness to the originals, so far as the face is 
concerned. 

It ma}' be well, at the beginning, to explain the 
meaning of a few technical words which are used 
in connection with the service. The player who 
delivers the service is of course called the ' ' server, ' ' 
but the one who receives it is technically known as 
the "striker-out." The term "fault'' means that 
a service is not good, for some reason specified in 
No. 8 of the lyaws of Lawn Tennis. (See Appendix.) 

Law No. 6 is the onh' one which has any direct 
bearing upon the subject discussed in this chapter, 
and I therefore quote it, as follows : 

6. Tlie Server shall serve with one foot on the base 
line or peroendicularly above said line, and with the other 
foot behind said line, but not necessarily upon the ground. 
He shall deliver the ser^ice from the right to the left courts, 
alternately, beginning from the right. 



The latter portion of the law, coniniencing with 
the words " he shall deliver," is not pertinent, but 
the remainder is important, inasmuch as it contains 
the only injunction found anywhere in the rules 
concerning the position which a pla5^er must as- 
sume in serving. The words ' ' perpendicularly 
above said line " were onl}" in recent 3'ears added to 
the rule, which formerly, like the English law on 
the subject, required the server to serve vvath one 
foot directly on the line. It naturally followed that 
a conscientious umpire was obliged to call a foot 
■fault, or, in other words, call the ser\ace a bad one, 
if the player happened to serve with the toe of his 
shoe in front of the line and the heel slightl}' lifted 
from the ground, a circumstance which frequently 
occurred. In such a position the server practicall}^ 
met the requirements of the rule, but suffered through 
a technicalit}^, and it was to remed}^ this injustice, 
and at the same time make the duties of the umpire 
less arduous and disagreeable, that the words " per- 
pendicularh' above said line ' ' were added. The 
rule of course applies to all methods of serving, the 
only distinction being, that in some of the methods, 
as shown hereafter, the left foot is placed upon or 
above the line and the right foot behind it, while in 
others the positions of the feet are reversed. 

The following list comprises all of the important 
methods of serving : 

I. Overhand Senace. (Fore-handed.) 
II. Reverse Overhand Service. 

III. Underhand Twist Service. (Fore-handed.) 

IV. Underhand Twist Service. (Back-handed.) 
V. Underhand Service with Cut. 

The last named would hardly be worth mention- 



— 31 — 



ing as a separate and distinct method were it not 
for the fact that this is the ser\'ice which was gen- 
erally used in the earlv days of the game, and which 

has since been 
commonh' adopt- 
ed b}' ladies. 
During the past 
few 3'ears, how- 
ever, a majority of 
women, who have 
taken up the game 
in earnest, have 
cultivated an over- 
hand ser^dce, evi- 
dentl}' believing 
that the increased 
effectiveness of 
their pla}' would 
more than com- 
pensate for the ac- 
companying sacri- 
fice of grace. 

Taking up the 
various ser\-ices in 
the order named, 
let us consider 

I. The Overhand 
Service. This is 
the ser^-ice which 
is most commonly 
used. Speed is its 
Assuming- that the sender is right- 







FiG. 2. Overhand Service. 

chief merit 

handed, the left foot should be placed upon the 

base line, and the right foot a short distance behind 



it. As one stands in this position the side of 
the body should be toward the net. The ball, 
which is of course held in the left hand, should 
be thrown straight into the air from a point about 
opposite to the left arm or shoulder of the ser\^er. 
The ball should be thrown at a certain distance from 
the body, and that distance is about represented by 
the length of the forearm and hand. At the same 
time that the ball is thrown, the racket is lifted in the 
air and then allowed to drop downward until the 
head of the racket is about opposite to the middle of 
the back. But the main point of this service is speed, 
and in order to secure the greatest speed, the weight 
and power of the whole bod}^ must be employed. It 
follows then, that simultaneously with the throwing 
of the ball and the dropping of the racket behind 
the back, the weight of the body should be thrower 
back upon the right foot. The head of the racket 
should now be made to describe an arc, commencing 
from the point behind the back, and swinging up- 
ward until it meets the ball at the highest point to 
which the arm can be extended. At the same time 
that the upward swing of the racket begins, the body 
should once more be thrown forward, so that its 
whole weight and power are exerted when the racket 
and ball meet. 

The height, to which the ball should be thrown, 
is of course dependent upon the length of arm of the 
serA^er. The object of the overhand service is to 
drive the ball downward into the service court, and 
to do this it is necessary that the racket should strike 
on top of the ball. It follows then, that the ball 
should be thrown, so that the highest point which it 
reaches will be a trifle below the highest point of 



— 23 — 

the arc described by the head of the racket. If 
the ball is thrown too high or too low, a swift 
ser\'ice will almost invariably result in a fault. 

Fig. I ver}^ fairly represents an overhand service, 
in which the swing from the middle of the back has 
begun. The ball which appears plainly, has about 
reached its maximum height, for although the racket 
seems to be a considerable distance away, it must be 
remembered that it is swinging through the air at 
lightning speed. It is probable that the server in 
Fig. I is not attempting to deliver a very swift ser- 
vice, for the feet are so close together, that the whole 
weight of the body could not properh-- be thrown 
from one to the other, as before described. When 
the effort is to be violent, the right foot should be 
about two feet behind the line. 

The characteristics of a swift service are shown 
very plainly in Fig. 2. Here the racket and ball 
are almost on the point of meeting, though the latter 
does not appear. There is no doubt about the speed 
of this service. In Fig. i, where the service is of 
medium pace, it is probable that the right foot will 
continue to rest upon the ground, when the racket 
strikes the ball. In Fig. 2, however, the weight of 
the bod}' has been thrown forward so violently, as the 
racket approaches the ball, that the left foot is lifted 
entirely from the ground. As the ball is struck 
and the racket descends, the body will almost surely 
fall, unless the left foot is carrried forward to save 
it. Fig. 2 represents Mr. H. A. Taylor, who is un- 
doubtedl}' one of the swiftest servers in this countr}^ 
Being left-handed, he serves with the right foot upon 
the line and the left behind it'. 

II. 77^1? Reverse Overhand Service. This method 



— 24 — 

fails to produce the speed which is the characteris- 
tic of the ordinar}^ overhand service, but in its place 
an awkward twist is imparted to the ball. In the 
ordinary method, as described, the ball takes a 
straight bound after striking the ground, provided 
it has been struck squareh' with the face of the 
racket. If not struck squarely, which is usually 
the case, a twist is imparted, which causes the ball 
to bound to the right of the "striker-out." The 
object of the Reverse Overhand Service is to impart 
a twist which shall cause the ball to bound in the 
opposite direction, or to the left of the striker-out. 
If this could be done with great speed, the service 
would be most effective, but the twist is the most 
important feature, and, as a general rule, any great 
amount of twist can be secured only at a correspond- 
ing sacrifice of speed. Fig. 3. at the beginning of 
this chapter, admirably represents this service, as 
delivered by Mr. R. D. Sears. Hither of the feet may 
be placed upon the line, and it is difficult to advise 
one or the other, but in Fig 3, it will be seen that 
Mr. Sears prefers to use the left. 

The ball must be thrown in quite a different man- 
ner from that before described. First : It must be 
thrown slightly farther toward the net. Second : It 
must not be thrown so high, for the ball is not 
struck while the arm is full}- extended upward. In 
Fig. 3 the ball has just left the racket, and yet the 
arm is extended straight from the shoulder, with 
only a slight upward tendenc}'. 

The actual swing of the racket to meet the ball, 
instead of starting from the middle of the back, as in 
the ordinar}' method, begins from a point behind 
the right shoulder. From there the racket passes 



in front of and rather close to the face. As it meets 
the ball, which has been thrown slightly forward, 
the racket is turned at an angle outward from the 
body, exactly as shown in Fig. 3. 

In this, as well as in ever)^ overhand service, the 
racket should be grasped at the end of the handle. 

III. The Underhand Tivist Service {fore-handed). 
For a slow ser\'ice, this is undoubtedl}^' the most 




Fig. 4. Underh.^nd Twist Service. (Fore-handed.) 

effective which can be used. It is an exceedingly 
difficult service, not only to deliver properly, but 
also to clearl}' describe. It is chief!}' used when the 
server wishes to follow his service by immediatel}^ 
running to the net, which occurs more often in the 
double than in the single game. Dr. D wight and 
Mr. R. D. Sears are more expert in serving by this 



— 26 — 

method than anj^ players whom I have seen, and 
each employ's a different s\-stem. 

Dr. Dwight places his left foot upon the service 
line and almost faces the net, but draws his racket 
across the ball on the right side of his bod}-. Mr. 
Sears places either foot (usuall}^ the left) upon the 
line, but the other only just behind it. He faces 
directly toward the net and bends both knees, as 
shown in Fig. 4. Instead of grasping the racket at 
the end of the handle, as in the overhand service, he 
places his hand at least three or four inches from the 
end. The racket commences its swing from the 
right side of the body, the head of the racket being 
then about level with the waist, and passes directly 
z« /;'t7;;/' of the bod}^ over to the left side. The ball 
is of course held in the left hand, at arm's length and 
exactly in front of the bod3^ As soon as the swing 
of the racket begins, the ball is quietly dropped, not 
thrown, from the hand, and meets the racket at a 
point about level with the pla3'er"s knees. The 
point of meeting would be lower were it not for the 
fact that the racket is grasped several inches from 
the end of the handle, as before described. 

The racket is neither vertical nor horizontal, as it 
swings in front of the body. It is exactl}'^ between 
the two. Inasmuch as the swing begins from the 
side of the body, the racket naturally has a slight 
motion forward, which is sufficient to send the ball 
slowly over the net, while the lateral motion from 
the right side to the left imparts to the ball a tre- 
mendous amount of twist, which causes it, on strik- 
ing the ground, to break sharply to the left of the 
striker- out. 

Fig. 4 does not represent Mr. Sears in the act of 



delivering this service, but it shows his method with 
considerable accurac}'. The right foot should per- 
haps be a little nearer the line, and the hand should 
be grasping the racket at a greater distance from the 
end of the handle. With these slight exceptions, 
this cut presents a ver}- fair picture of the beginning 

of an underhand twist serv- 
ice. The racket has just 
begun to swing from the 
side, and the ball, which 
plainl}^ appears, has al- 
ready been dropped from 
the hand. 

I\'. Underhand Tzvist 

Service {baekJianded). This 

is exactly the reverse of the 

service just described, both 

in method and result. 

Here the right foot is 

usualh' placed upon the 

line, and the 

^ racket commen- 

S"m:S ces its swinar 



from the left side 
of the body. It 




Fig. 5. I'XDERHAND SERVICE WITH CUT. 



passes in front of 
the bod}^ and 
over to the right side, meeting the ball exactly as 
before. The lateral motion from the left side to the 
right imparts a twist, which causes the ball to break 
to the right of the striker-out. 

V. Underhand Service with Cut. This method of 
.serving is comparativel}' unimportant, and yet at 
times may be extremely effective. In playing upon 



og 

soft or wet turf, for instance, I should prefer to be 
served a swift overhand service rather than an under- 
hand cut. 

Fig. 5 shows the position of the server just prior 
to the deliver}' of this service. The left foot is 
placed upon the line and the side of the body is 
toward the net, as in the overhand service. The ball 
is merely dropped from the hand, as the racket is 
brought forward to meet it. The racket is held in 
such a manner (see Fig. 5), that instead of striking 
squarel}' against the side of the ball, it goes slightly 
underneath it. The motion of the ball is not thus 
affected so that it bounds to one side or the other, as 
in the underhand twist services. The bound is 
straight, but the ball rises onl}^ a ver}^ short distance 
from the ground, and in this lies the only value of 
the underhand cut. It can readily be seen that it is 
most effective upon a court of soft turf, where the 
ver}^ nature of the ground assists it. 




Fig. A. Forehand Stroke (Off the Ground). 




CHAPTER III. 

THE STROKE. 

"Methinks, I play, as I have seen them do." 

— A Winter's Tale. 

TaWN tennis strokes, in general, may be 
'^^'^ either ground strokes or volleys. A volley is 
any return of the ball before it reaches the ground, 
while &. ground stroke is any return from the bound 
of the ball. A half-volley is really a ground stroke, 
for the ball is not returned until after it has struck 
the ground; but it is the theory of the stroke that 
the racket should meet the ball at almost the same 
moment as the ball strikes the ground, and it is 
therefore not inaptly termed a half-volley. 

All strokes, whether volleys or ground strokes, 
may be either forchaiid or backhand. A forehand 
stroke (for a right-handed man) is one in which 
the arm swings on t"he right side of the body. h. 
backhand stroke is any stroke in which the racket 
meets the ball on the left side, the arm swinging 
across or in fiont of the body. 



— 32 — 

Again, all strokes, whether volleys or ground 
strokes, may be made with or without cut. A 
stroke without cut is made by meeting the ball 
squarely with the head of the racket, or, in other 
words, by holding the racket so th^.t the head forms 
an exact right angle to the course of the ball. If a 
cut is desired, the racket must be held so that the 
head forms an angle, greater than a great angle, to 
the course of the ball. When the ball meets the 
racket held in this position, it is given such a 
motion that it rises only a short distance from the 
ground at the end of the return, and in this lies the 
chief value of the cut. 

The following list comprises all of the important 
strokes: 

I. The forehand stroke (off the ground). 
II. The backhand stroke (off the ground). 

III. The forehand volley. 

IV. The backhand volley. 

V. The forehand half-volle5^ 

VI. The backhand half-volley. 

VII. The smash. 

• Before going into a separate analysis of each, let 

us first consider certain characteristics which are 

common to all of these strokes when they are 

executed in good form. The word y<;^r///, as used 

in this connection, is a general term, which may be 

concisely defined as the method of play. When we 

speak of a man as playing in good form or bad form, 

we mean that he does or does not play according 

to the best methods, or, rather, those methods which 

the success and experience of expert players have 

demonstrated to be the best. The disposition of 

the feet, the swing of the arm, the use of the eye, 



33 — 



the general carriage of the body — all these are con- 
sidered under the general term form. 

Mr. R. D. Sears, champion of the United States 
for seven successive years, is said to have advised 
the Lawn Tennis player " to keep his eyes on the 
ball, and his feet on the ground." Whether it 
was our popular ex - champion or some other 

who delivered himself of 
this sage advice, it is 
certain that two excel- 
lent principles of good 
form are therein laid 
down. The use of Mr. 
Sears' name in this con- 
nection is an unpleasant 
reminder of his enforced 
retirement from Lawn 
Tennis competition. 
H i s participation was 
of practical value to the 
game, for inexperienced 
players, by merely watch- 
ing his plcy, were 
often able to secure 
a complete lesson 
in good form. 

Taking up these 
c haracteris tics 
which are common to all strokes, it ma}^ first be laid 
down as a general rule that no stroke should be 
made with the two feet together. In every case it is 
customary and necessary to take a step forward 
with either one foot or the other, and the length of 
the step is almost always proportionate to the 




Fig. B. End of Drop Stroke. 



— 34 — 

amount of body power which must be infused into 
the stroke. The latter principle is illustrated by 
the fact that in making a backhand stroke, in 
which the wrist and forearm play the most im- 
portant part, the feet are a much shorter distance 
apart than they are in the forehand drive, which, 
to be effective, must be made with speed, and to 




Fig. C. Back-hand Stkoke (Off the Ground). 



secure speed the power of the body must be used 
to back up the strength of the arm. 

The reason for the rule is obvious. As the arm 
swings forward in a stroke, the body naturally 
accompanies it. The natural balance of the body 
will be destroyed unless one of the feet is thrust 
forward to save it. If the exertion is violent, the 
foot must be extended further, as in the forehand 



— 35 — 

drive. If the body is but little used, as in the back- 
hand stroke, only a short step is necessary. 

Again, it is a universal rule that the step must be 
taken with the foot which is most far removed 
from the racket. Thus, in any forehand stroke, the 
step is taken with the left foot, while in any back- 
hand stroke it is the right foot which is used. 




Fig T) End of I,ow Forehand Volley. 

These illustrations of course apply only when the 
player is right-handed, for if he happens to be left- 
handed the positions of the feet are reversed, as 
will be observed in some of the accompanying cuts, 
which represent a left-handed player. Right- 
handed or left-handed, however, the general rule is 
of course the same — the step is taken with the foot 



— 36— 

most far removed from the racket at the beginning 
of the stroke. 

As the stroke is completed, the foot which is 
behind is now brought forward to join the other, 
and the body is once more upon a firm footing and 
prepared for another movement in any direction. 
The player will be best prepared for the next 
movement if the body is thrown somewhat forward 
and the knees slightly bent. In such a position 
the next step, in whatever direction it may be, can 
be taken with the least possible friction. 

Another important element of form is the man- 
agement of the racket, and the arm which wields it. 
The racket should be grasped at the end of the 
handle, unless an extraordinary amount of cut is 
desired, and then the hand may properly be placed 
at some distance from the end; but such a stroke 
belongs to Tennis rather than Lawn Tennis. The 
hand should grasp the handle firmly, but not 
tighth", for its position in a forehand stroke differs 
from that which it assumes in a backhand stroke, 
and the change must necessarily be sudden and 
rapid. It is true that a few good players claim 
that the position of the hand should not, and in 
their own .cases does not, change, but it is difficult 
to understand how both strokes can be thus made 
in good form. For a forehand stroke, I suppose 
that about every player grasps the racket in the 
same manner. The fingers and thumb meet in 
front, and the body of the hand is behind the 
handle, where it can best give power to the stroke. 
For a backhand stroke, however, various changes 
are made by different pla}rers. My own method is 
to allow the body of the hand to slip from the back 



— 3^: 



to the side of the handle, and to place the thumb 
along the back, in which position I find it a most 
useful aid in giving direction to the return. 

The swing of the racket before meeting the ball 
should not be long or particularly violent; for, if 
the strength of the arm and body is properly used, 
the length of the swing adds but little to the power 

of the return, 
and may do 
much to injure 
the accuracy or 
squareness with 
which the ball is 
struck. The 
arm itself 
should swing 
easily and free- 
ly, each joint 
being given full 
play. Making a 
stroke with a 
stiff or cramped 
arm is a most 
common fault. 

Let us now 
take up the dif- 
ferent strokes 




Fig. E. Forehand Volley. 



in their order, as before given, and consider each 
separately: 

I. The Fo)'ehand Stroke (off the ground). To 
make this stroke perfectly, the player should be 
at such a distance back from the point where the 
ball strikes the ground that his racket will meet 
the ball on its descent from the bound. The stroke 



— 38 — 

should be made, that is, the racket and ball should 
meet, when the ball has nearly reached the ground 
for a second time, the arm then being stretched to 
its full length and moving freely in a plane parallel 
and close to the side of the body. The advantage 
of a stroke made in this manner over one in which 
the arm is allowed to swing out from the body 




Fig. F. Backhand Volley. 

(commonly called a round-arm stroke) is obvious. 
When the arm swings straight and close to the 
body, the hand and the eye are brought into a close 
union, and the ball is directed with much cer- 
tainty; but if the arm is rounded, and the hand 
thereby removed from the plane parallel to the 



— 39 — 

side of the body, the aim and direction of the 
return are seriously affected, just as they would be 
in the case of a marksman who, in using a rifle, 
should hold it at a distance from the body instead 
of sighting with his eye along the barrel. 

The step forward is taken with the left foot and 
is usually quite long, for the body-power is largely 



Fig. G. Forehand Half-volley 

exerted in making this stroke. Fig A, at the 
beginning of this chapter, shows the racket at 
about the exact position in which it meets the ball. 
The figure represents the stroke just as I have 
described it, except that the arm, instead of being 
fully extended downward, appears to be somewhat 
bent at the elbow. This apparent inaccuracy will 
shortly be explained. 



—40 — 

In the ordinary forehand stroke the head of the 
racket is brought squarely against the balL More 
or less cut, however, has always been used by good 
players in making the stroke, and during recent 
years another element has been added which has 
made practically a new stroke. The new stroke is 
that which is commonly known as the drop stroke. 
The general movement of the body and racket are 
the same as in the ordinary forehand stroke, until 
the racket and ball meet. At this moment, however, 
the racket is drawn vertically upward. The swing 
of the racket forward sends the ball over the net, 
while the vertical movement upward gives it a 
rotary motion through the air, which causes it to 
shoot suddenly and sharply downward as soon as 
it has passed the net. The scientific principle in- 
volved will be recognized as the same as that which 
the Base-ball pitcher employs in throwing a drop 
curve, or, as the; Base-ballists sometimes call it, a 
^'down-shoot." 

The player in Fig. A is lifting his racket up- 
ward, but unless the movement is made with more 
violence than it appears to be in this photograph, 
but little drop can be secured. The extent of the 
drop is proportionate to the violence and sudden- 
ness with which the racket is lifted. Indeed, the 
fact that this stroke, in its most effective form, can 
not be made easily and quietly, constitutes per- 
haps the only objection to its use. The extra exer- 
tion which mast necessarily be employed leaves 
the player in an unfortunate position at the end of 
the stroke, a fact which is plainly demonstrated in 
Fig. B. It is only fair to add, however, that this 
figure does not accurately represent the end of a 



41 



drop stroke, as it is usually made. The player, 
whom the figure represents, is very successful with 
the stroke, but executes it in a manner somewhat 
different from that described. At the same time 
that he lifts his racket upward, he also turns it at 
an angle inward toward the body; or, in other 
words, at an angle the reverse of that at which he 

would hold it, if he 
desired to cut. It is 
difficult to see how 
this extra movement 
can add to the effect- 
iveness of the stroke, 
and it is that feature, 
more than any other, 
which finally brings 
the racket into the 
curious position 
shown in Fig. B. 

II. The Backhand 
Stroke (off the 
ground). The step 
^^ forward is here taken 
with the right foot. 
The step need not 
be long, for but little 

Fig. II. BACKII.A.ND Half-volley. bodv-pOWer is USed. 

The shifting of the racket to the left side of the 
body is simultaneous with the beginning of the 
step. At the end of this movement the hand and 
forearm lie close to the front of the body, and form 
a right angle to the upper arm. The swing to 
meet the ball is made almost entirely with the 
forearm. The racket and ball should meet at the 




— 42 — 

moment when the arm is once more completely- 
straight. The actual point of meeting should be 
well in front of the body, and about on a line with 
the left leg. 

When the meeting occurs at that point, the hand 
which holds the racket is directly in front of the 
body, and a close union of the hand and eye is 
again secured. 

Fig. C is not a satisfactory representation of the 
stroke, for several reasons. In the first place the 
bound of the ball was so short that the player, in 
order to reach it, was obliged to take an unusually 
long step. Again, the ball has already been struck, 
and the picture shows the position of the racket at 
the very end of the stroke. 

III. and IV. The Forehand and Backhand Volleys. 
In making a low forehand volley — that is, one 
where the racket and ball meet at any point below 
the players's knee — the same methods should be 
employed as those already described in connection 
wi-th the forehand stroke off the ground. The 
arm should swing in a plane parallel to the side of 
the body, and, if a drop is desired, the racket must 
be lifted in the same manner as described (page 
40). A cut also adds much to the effectiveness of 
a low forehand volley. The step is of course taken 
with the left foot, and the swing of the racket to 
meet the ball should be even shorter and less vio- 
lent than in making a forehand stroke off the 
ground. In making any volley the racket should 
be brought forward quietly, for the mere impact of 
the ball against the tightly strung racket is suffi- 
cient to send it back with considerable speed. 

Fig. D shows the racket at the end of a low fore- 



— 43 — 

hand volley. A low backhand volley is made in 
about the same way as a backhand stroke off the 
ground (page 41). 

In actual play, however, low volleys are not often 
made. The back-court player has practically no 
volleying to do, while the tendenc}'' of those who 
favor a volleying game is to approach so close to 
the net that they are able to meet the ball while it 
is at least three feet (the height of the net) from 
the ground. The great majority of volleys are 
therefore between the waist and shoulder, and here 
the methods which have been described can no 
longer be employed. In making a forehand volley 
between the waist and shoulder, the racket and 
ball must meet at a considerable distance from the 
body. But the point of meeting should not be 
directly at the side of the body, for in that case the 
hand is drawn completely out of union with the 
eye. This union can still be somewhat preserved 
if the stroke is made at a considerable distance in 
front of the body, exactly as shown in Fig. E. That 
figure is my idea of a forehand volley, when exe- 
cuted in perfect form. It will be observed that the 
racket is meeting the ball with little or no cut, and 
that the wrist is playing a most important part in 
the stroke. The player is Mr. R. L. Beeckman. 

In the backhand volley the union of hand and 
eye is again perfectly secured, for if the stroke is 
made, as shown in Fig. F, the hand remains almost 
on a line with the eye, and may direct the ball with 
an unerring aim. Here again it is seen that the 
stroke is made almost entirely with the forearm 
and wrist. 

V. The Forehand Half -Volley. This stroke is to be 



4-i 



used only when the return can be made in no other 
way. This necessity usually arises when the ball 
strikes directly at your feet. If you can volle)^ by 
stepping forward a step or two, it is, as a general 
rule, better to do this than to resort to the half- 
volley. On the other hand, it is generally better to 

make the half-volley 
rather than step 
backward in order 
to receive the ball 
on the bound. In 
making the latter 
movement the 
weight of the body 
must be thrown back- 
ward^ and this vio- 
lates a general rule 
of good form, which 
requires that in mak- 
ing an}^ stroke the 
weight of the body 
should be thrown 
forward. 

There is room for 
some difference of 
opinion as to how a 
half -volley should 

Kg. K. Backhand Smash. ^g made. The idea 

of the stroke is that the racket should meet the ball 
at the very beginning of the latter's bound from 
the ground. Some players think that the racket 
should be brought down on the ball with a chop, 
but it is difficult to see how an accurate return can 
be made in that wav. The best method, in mv 




— 45 — 

opinion, is as follows : the racket should be low- 
ered until it almost touches the ground at a point 
perhaps two feet, or thereabouts, from where the 
ball will probably strike. The racket is then brought 
forward along and close to the ground to meet the 
ball. The motion of the arm is very much the 
same as in the ordinary forehand stroke off the 
ground. It is full}^ extended downward and swings 
close to the body. Fig. G quite accurately repre- 
sents this idea of the stroke. In that representa- 
tion the racket will meet the ball at a point about 
on a line with the left foot. It will be noticed that 
the step is unusually long. This is because the 
stroke is made well in front of the bod}% and at the 
same time close to the ground. The body inclines 
forward more than in any other stroke, and the 
step must be unusualh^ long in order to preserve 
the balance. 

VI. 2'he Backliaiid Half- Volley. Fig. H represents 
this stroke when made in the same way as the fore- 
hand half-volley just described. The racket and 
ball meet almost in front of the body, and the hand 
which wields the racket is directly in line with the 
eye. The player shown in Fig. H is left-handed, and 
the step is therefore taken with the left foot. 

VII. The Sinasli. When we speak of smashing a 
ball it means, to those who are untutored in Lawn 
Tennis methods, nothing more than striking the 
ball with an unusual amount of violence and force. 
But the technical meaning of the smash, as a stroke, 
is Quite different. It is a term which is usually 
applied to any hard volley from above the shoulder. 
If a ball strikes the ground and bounds above your 
head, there is no reason whj^ 5'our return of that 



— 46 — 

ball, provided it is made with force and directed 
downward into the opposite court, should not be 
called a smash. But smashes, as a general rule, 
are volleys in which the racket meets the ball at 
nearly the highest point to which the arm can 
extend it. A smash is nothing more than an over- 
hand service (Fig. 2, Chap. II.), except that the serv- 
ice is delivered at the base line, while the smash is 
generally made at or near the net. The purpose of 
both the service and the smash is to direct the ball 
swiftly downward into the opposite court, but as 
the smash is usually made from a point near the 
net, it follows that the racket should strike more on 
top of the ball than it does in the service. This is 
about the only point of difference between the two. 
A smash may be made either forehanded or back- 
handed. A backhand smash is but little used, 
for an agile player will usually find time to place 
himself upon the left of the ball and smash fore- 
handed. The whole strength of the body may be 
thrown into a forehand smash, while the arm 
alone almost entirely performs the work of the 
other. (Fig. K.) 





'cAa^-riC ^. i^^ 



xT 




CHAPTER IV. 

THE SINGLE GAME. 

"Let them play. — Play, sirs." 

— King Henry IV 



TV SSUMING that the reader is acquainted with 
^ V«: the rule.s, and that he is now familiar with 
the different services and strokes, I shall attempt to 
give a few practical ideas, in this and the following 
chapters, about the actual pla3ang of the game. 
Although the pre.sent chapter is supposed to treat 
of the single game, it will, without doubt, contain 
some ideas equall}' applicable to the double game, 
which will be separatelj^ considered in a later 
chapter. It ma}- be proper to add, that I shall en- 
deavor, in this chapter, to set forth these points in 
rather a general way only. The reader will perhaps 
find some of the same ideas, but together with 
others, in greater detail and possibly in more prac- 
tical form, in the succeeding chapter, which is ad- 
dressed particularly to \-oung beginners. 



— so- 
Taking up these ideas in their natural order, we 
first consider 

THE SERVICE. 
And here the point most commonlj^ discussed is 
whether or not speed is essential or desirable. I 
have always been mildly opposed to the use of a 
very swift service in the single game, on the ground 
that it was an almost useless expenditure of energy. 
Mj^ own service is decidedly weak, but I hardly 
think that I have allowed that fact to influence my 
opinion upon the question, as one of polic}^ It is 
true that a swift service will score many aces against 
an inferior player, but it is equally true that a player 
of only average abilit}' cares nothing for the speed 
with which you maj^ serve, provided the ball falls 
within his reach. A swift service requires a violent 
effort, which must have some effect upon the en- 
durance. A service of moderate speed economizes 
strength, and at the same time may be placed out of 
the reach of the striker-out, if well directed. Again, 
the player who serves with moderate speed will 
make his first service good four times out of five, 
while the swift server will serve faults in the same 
proportion and be compelled to fall back upon a 
slow second service. And, finally, the swift ser\'er 
is much more likely to make double faults. 

Dr. Dwight, however, favors speed, mainly be- 
cause the striker-out is afraid or unable to place his 
return of a swift service, and the advantage thus 
gained by the server will probabl}^ win him the 
point in the next two or three strokes. There are 
some few players, too, who appear to have a peculiar 
ability to serve with great swiftness and still make 
few faults. Such an abilit}- seems to be more or less 



— 51 — 

of a knack. To possess it one need not have great 
strength of arm, for strong-armed men are often 
weak servers. While a tall man naturally has an 
advantage, height is not a necessit3^ Mr. H. A. 
Ta34or, who is much below the average in stature, is 
in my opinion one of the swiftest and most success- 
ful servers in the country. The ball seems to leave 
his racket as if shot out of a cannon, and j-et there 
is nothing peculiar about his method except that he 
starts from, a point behind the base line and takes 
two or three steps before swinging his racket, in- 
stead of standing with one foot upon the line, which 
is usually done. The danger of such a method is 
in the liabilit)' to make foot faults. 

When pla^nng a match, if I win the toss and 
there is but little choice between courts, I usually 
compel ni)- adversar}- to serve, not on account of my 
own weak service, but because I am anxious to play at 
the net; and I can usually secure such a position upon 
my return of the service. If ni}- adversar}' happens 
to have a very severe service, such as Taylor's, I 
niSLj perhaps be unable to return it so that I can 
run to the net, but I still compel him to serve, in 
the hope that his first ser\dces ma}' be faults. If 3'ou 
wish to pursue the polic}- of running to the net on 
3^our own ser\nce (a polic3' which is almost univers- 
ally condemned b3^ good pla3'ers), 3-ou should sen^e 
a very slow service, with a cut or twist, if possible, 
so that 3'ou nia3' be well up toward the net when 
3'our adversar3' makes his return. These last few 
ideas about ser\dce bring us naturall3' to the consid- 
eration of a question which has been much discussed. 
As a general rule, which is the more profitable policy 
to adopt, — 



The Net Game, or The Back-Court Game ? 

The substance of this inquiry is about as follows : 
is it sound policy to run to the net at every possible 
opportunity, or is it, as a general rule, preferable to 
remain in the back of the court? If you adopt 
the first policy, 3'ou reh' upon accurate volleying 
and an occasional smash to win the point ; if the 
second, you may score by passing 5'our adversary 
(assuming that he is playing at the net), or by skillful 
and well-timed ' ' lobbing. ' ' It naturally occurs to 
a well-balanced mind, that a judicious mixture of 
the two policies, each being used as occasion re- 
quires, would be most proper. This is undoubtedly 
true, but the trouble is that different pla3'^ers have 
different opinions about the requirements of a par- 
ticular occasion. One may think it proper to run to 
the net, when another may prefer to remain at the 
base line, and thus these two methods of playing 
have grown to be separate and distinct policies, each 
having its adherents and followers. 

In the earlier days of the game, it was the custom 
for both players to stand at the back of the court, 
and return each ball from the bound. If I remem- 
ber aright, it is the Renshaws who are given the 
credit for. the idea, at least in its perfection, of re- 
turning the ball before it reaches the ground, and it 
was their accurate volleying and hard smashing, 
which brought them at once to the front in England, 
where they have remained the champions for many 
years. Their style of course found many imitators, 
both in their own country and ours, and I think that 
it has been the general idea among the best pla}-ers 
of the United States during the past few years, that 
under ordinary conditions a good vollever could 



easih' defeat a first-class back-court player. Some, 
in fact, have been so enthusiastic, that the}- may 
properly be called extremists upon the question. 

The most notable of these is perhaps Mr. O. S. 
Campbell, a 3'oung but prominent pla^-er who per- 
formed most brilliantly in a recent Championship 
Tournament at Newport. Mr. Campbell's pla}^ is 
chiefly remarkable for strong- and accurate volleying, 
and his fondness for net play is so great, that he al- 
most invariably runs to the net on his own service, 
a practice which is usually considered suicidal. We 
shall probably never again have the opportunity of 
seeing the two t3'pes of game opposed to each other 
under such striking circumstances, as when Mr. 
Campbell and Mr. E. G. Meers, a well-known Eng- 
lish pla},-er, met in the tournament of which I have 
just spoken. Mr. Campbell w^as about eighteen 
years of age, almost a boy, while Mr. Meers never 
touched a racket until he was forty. Mr. Meers had 
come from England with the praiseworth}^ intention 
of taking back our Championship Cup, if possible, 
while Mr. Campbell was fired with the idea of pre- 
venting such a proceeding, if he could. Campbell 
played a perfect volleying game, while Meers was 
the typical back-court player, rarely going to the 
net unless circumstances compelled it. Under such 
conditions, then, it was quite a triumph for Camp- 
bell and the style of game wdiich he represented, that 
long before the finish of the hard fought contest, he 
had compelled his adversary to adopt his own tactics, 
including even the running to the net on a service. 
Mr. Meers would probably claim that this match 
hardh' afforded a fair test of the merits of the two 
st3'les of game, inasmuch as he was inlaying in a 



— 54 — 

strange countr}^ and under conditions of temperature 
and atmosphere differing from those to which he 
was accustomed. This may be true, but I think 
that a majority of the spectators, who thoroughly 
understood I^awn Tennis, agreed that Mr. Meers 
was the more skillful of the two players, and that 
he was defeated onh^ because he persisted, until too 
late, in playing a back-court game against the bril- 
liant volleying of Mr. Campbell. 

We were told by Mr. Meers that the present tend- 
enc}^ of English plaj^ers is toward a return to the 
base-line game. My own opinion is decidedly in 
favor of the net game. I should never run to the 
net on my own service ; but I almost always attempt 
to do so on my return of an adversary's service, and 
am willing to take great risks otherwise in order to 
secure the position at the net. In regard to the 
exact point at which 3'ou should stand when playing 
at the net, I think that nearly midway between the 
service line and the net is the proper place. At that 
point you will be near enough to smash and volley 
with force, few balls will strike at your feet, 3'ou are 
least likely to be passed, and there is but little 
danger that the ball will be ' ' lobbed ' ' over your 
head. 

Use' OF Mental Povv'ers in Lawn Tennis. 

Some years ago it was quite common to regard 
Tawn Tennis as a game requiring so little ph^^sical 
effort that it could afford amusement only for 
women, childrerj and effeminate men. This idea was 
soon effectually dispelled, but even at the present 
time many, who are unfamiliar with the game, per- 
sist in thinking that it consists of nothing more than 
knocking a ball back and forth across a net, and that 



— 55 — 

there is no occasion for the use of the head in such a 
simple proceeding. There could not be a more mis- 
taken idea. PH3'sical strength is necessary as a 
foundation, but, in addition, determination, confi- 
dence, coolness, steadiness, pluck, perseverance, pa- 
tience, close observation, self-control, method — all 
these, among others, are mental qualities which are 
thoroughly tested and trained in this game, and all 
of which, in a greater or less degree, go to make up 
the successful I^awn Tennis player. 

All other conditions being equal between two 
plaj-ers, it is not too much to sa^^ that the one who 
is most thoroughly determined and has the most 
complete confidence will gain the victor}'. Circum- 
stances rarely arise when it pays to be other than 
aggressive. A defensive polic}' has never won many 
matches at Lawn Tennis. On the other hand, it is 
not right to adopt an aggressive policj^ in a fier}' and 
hot-headed way. The value of coolness, steadiness 
and self-control can not be over-estimated. Lawn 
Tennis is a wonderfully quick game. In the mids-t 
of a rail}', a player has no time to stop and consider 
what he shall do next. Thought and action must 
be almost 'Simultaneous. As a natural consequence, 
it is more than common for a pla5'er of little experi- 
ence t'O become excited and lose his head, or to be 
' ' rattled, ' ' as we usuall}^ term this failing. The 
"rattled " player is often unable to make a stroke. 
It is perhaps true that only long experience will 
completely remedy such a trouble, but there are 
certain points, nevertheless, which I think should be 
of some assistance to a man who is easily unnen'ed. 
In the first place, he should play as slow a game as 
possible. I do not mean that he should be inactive 



in his movements during a rail}' or ' ' rest " ; '•■ but 
between the ' ' rests ' ' he should take time to consider 
that the performance in which he is engaged is not 
of so much importance, after all, and that there is 
little need of growing excited about it. Then again, 
he should never be in great haste to score a point. 
In the midst of a rally, he sees an opportunity to 
score b}' making an extraordinar}^ effort ; he takes 
his chances and attempts to be brilliant, but it is 
quite probable that the ball is not directed exactly 
as he intended, or perhaps his adversar}^ may make 
a skillful return ; the ball comes back, our excitable 
friend becomes discouraged at the result of his great 
effort, and is thus well on the road toward a bad 
case of " rattle." How much better if he had been 
patient and stead}- ; if he had allowed the risky 
chance to go by and waited for the sure one, which 
must have come later ! 

There are certain annoyances, however, which 
must severely test the self-control of the most unex- 
citable player. The ball may take an erratic bound, 
a spectator may approach too close to the court and 
interfere with a stroke, or, most anno5-ing of all, an 
umpire may err in his judgment at the most exciting 
stage of the game. Under such circumstances, it is 
of course difficult to restrain the angry passions, but 
the ability and power to do so should be carefully 
cultivated, for the loss of self-control only adds fuel 
to the flame. It should be remembered that such 
misfortunes may happen to one as well as another, 
and that if you suffer from them at one time, it will 
be "evened up " at the expense of your adversary 
later on. In regard to annoyances from umpires, it 

* " Rest '' is the equivalent of " rally." 



ina>- be said that many of these are the result of 
ignorance as to their duties rather than a faihire of 
eyesight ; as for instance, it happens quite often that 
an umpire calls out "good ball," and the player 
understands him as saying "fault," which is directl}^ 
the opposite. For this reason an umpire should be 
selected not only for his good eyesight, but also on 
account of his knowledge of the requirements of the 
position, the chief requirement being that he should 
not open his mouth while the ball is in play, except 
to say ' ' fault, " " let, " " out, "or " not up, ' ' mean- 
ing by the last named expression that the ball had 
not been returned until it had struck the ground for 
a second time. 

The average player does not appreciate the im- 
portance of perseverance or constant effort. Whether 
5'ou are awa}- ahead or far behind, the principle is 
the same. Lawn Tennis is a game with many queer 
turns and surprises, and many a player, having 
secured a good lead, and loafing along in fancied 
securit}^, is suddenly awakened to the fact that his ad- 
versary, by continual perseverance, has ' ' struck a 
new gait" and is rapidly overhauling him. It is 
then too late, for experience teaches the Lawn 
Tennis player that the hardest time in the w^orld to 
' ' brace ' ' is when his opponent is gaining. I can 
think of no better illustration of this point than a 
match in Doubles, which was plaj-ed at Narragansett 
Pier b}' H. A. Taj'lor and myself, against O. S. 
Campbell and R. P. Huntington, Jr. Ta^dor and I 
had won the first two sets with ease, mainly on ac- 
count of the poor play of the other side, and the score 
of the third and what might have been the final set, 
was 5 to 4, and fort}' love in our favor. We therefore 



— 58 — 

needed onl}^ one point to win, and probably could have 
gained it in one of the next three strokes if we had 
made concerted effort, or if the fear of defeat had en- 
tered our minds. Almost before we could realize it, 
the set was lost, and during the next two, try as we 
could, it seemed impossible to "brace," while our 
adversaries played with renewed courage. They won 
both sets and the match, and all because the}^ had per- 
severed even at the moment of almost certain defeat. 

I doubt that an experienced player ever goes into 
an important match without having previously 
thought out a plan of action. The man who plays 
without method or aim is never a success. It will 
never do, however, to adopt a fixed policy and use 
it against all alike. A victor}^ is as often won by an 
attack upon the weak points of an adversary as by 
using your own strong points. You should there- 
fore closely obser\^e the methods of those to whom 
you are opposed, detect their failings, and frame 
your own policy accordingly. If j^our adversary, for 
instance, is weak in back-hand play, and likely to 
become discouraged at his own failures, 3'ou should 
continual^ attack that weakness in his game. The 
championship match at Newport, in the summer of 
18S9, was won bj^ exactly such a method. In that 
contest I allowed my usually skillful adversary, Mr. 
Shaw, to defeat himself by his own errors, and he 
did it verj- easily, too. The result might have been 
far different if his great weakness in back-hand play 
had not discouraged and annoyed him. 

In I,awn Tennis, however, as in all other sports, 
Experience is the great teacher. Two hours of 
practice with an experienced and skillful player is 
worth more than two chapters of advice. 






wzaA/7 




CHAPTER V. 



HINTS TO YOUNG BEGINNERS.* 

"Nay, 
You shall find no boys' play here, I can tell 
3'ou. ' ' 

— /\iiig Heniy IV. 

Part I. 

'AWN TENNIS is a game in which there is more 
opportunity for skill and science than the 
ordinar}" observer imagines. There must always 
be a considerable difference of opinion as to how 
certain plays should be made, and so it is with 
some hesitation that I shall attempt to give a few 
points to young beginners. I shall assume that 
you are acquainted with the rudiments of the 
game, and that you are about to play a set with 
some imaginary adversary. I shall look on and 
give you a few hints, founded not only upon my 
own experience in playing, but also upon my obser- 
vation of other more skillful players. 

And now let us suppose that you are commencing 

* Reprinted by permission from " Harper's Young People." 



the set. Suppose you take the service. And first, 
where should you stand to serve? You must be 
governed somewhat by the position and strength 
of your adversary, but it is safe to lay it down as a 
general rule that the most advantageous position 
is as near as possible to the centre of the base line. 
In that position you will not only the better pro- 
tect your own court, but you will also worry your 
antagonist much more than in any other. Watch 
him closely, and if you think him weak back- 
handed, be sure to serve to his backhand. In re- 
ceiving your first service, he must of course be 
standing in the right-hand court. If he foolishly 
betrays his weakness in backhand play by edging 
over to the left, so that he may receive your service 
on his forehand, then a very easy service to the 
right hand corner of the court will be out of his 
reach. Don't try to put too much speed in your 
service, unless you are very anxious to make one 
particular point. Then " let her go." But, as a 
general rule, a very swift service is, in my opinion, 
a waste of energy; it is apt to strain the muscles of 
the shoulder, and is really not so difficult to return 
as one of moderate speed, but placed in an un- 
guarded portion of the service court, which is 
really a much larger space to serve into than it 
appears to be. Take this, then, as a general rule 
in serving: always attempt \.o place the service in 
an unguarded corner, but not with great speed, 
and never, by any chance, allow yourself to make a 
double fault. 

And now, no matter how much care you devote 
to your service, the chances are ten to one, if you 
are playing with a good player, that the ball will 



— 63 — 

come back to you. What, then, should be your 
position after serving ? When you serve from the 
middle of the base line, as I advised, you should 
remain standing at about that point, but ready to 
spring immediately to whichever side of the court 
your opponent may return the ball. I know that 
some of the most skillful players would tell you 
at this point that there are occasions when it pays 
to run to the net, or, rather, toward it, immediately 
after serving. Now there is no difference of opinion 
as to this point, viz., that a spot somewhere be- 
tween the service line and the net, where the ball 
may be best taken on a volley, is the proper place 
to stand, when you can get there from the position 
of serving without running a serious risk of losing 
the point on the way. It seems to me that you 
encounter even more than that serious risk in at- 
tempting, on any occasion, to run up immediately 
after serving. I never do it myself, except by way 
of experiment; and at the risk of running counter 
to the opinion of more experienced players than 
myself, I should advise you never to attempt it. 
Be patient and wait, but bear in mind all the time 
that that spot between the service line and the net 
is where you ought to be as soon as you can safely 
get there. If you can toss the ball high in the air 
and toward the back of your opponent's court, do 
so by all means at the first opportunity, and then 
run up as fast as you can, so as to be firm in your 
position when the ball comes back. Again, if you 
think that you have driven the ball so successfully 
from the back of the court, that your opponent 
must make a weak return, then, too, run up and 
take that return on a volley. 



— 64 — 

Up to this point I have been assuming that your 
opponent ran toward the net immediately after 
returning your service. If he does not do so (and 
in only one contingency, of which I shall speak 
hereafter, is it e-ntirely proper that he should not), 
then you must at once take advantage of this fact, 
and follow your very first return by running swiftly 
toward the net, for if you wait even for one return, 
your adversary may have recovered himself and 
reached the much coveted position. 

And now suppose that you have served your 
game out, and taken a position to receive the serv- 
ice of your adversary. What should that position 
be ? As to how far back from the service line it 
should be, that distance must of course be propor- 
tioned to the speed of the service which you are to 
receive. If your adversary has a ver}^ swift serv- 
ice, you may be obliged to stand back of the base 
line, and when in that position you must watch 
carefully to see that he does not fool 3^ou by drop- 
ping a very slow service just over the net. But 
it seems to me that it is more important to con- 
sider your position with relation to the side and 
centre lines of the court. If you are weak back- 
handed, don't betray that weakness just before 
receiving a service by edging over toward the 
centre-line so as to receive the service on your 
forehand. If you do this, a sharp opponent will 
not only place the service in the extreme right 
hand corner, out of your reach, but also, and of far 
more importance, he will thus at the very outset 
obtain knowledge of a fatal weakness in your game, 
and place four out of every five balls on j^our back- 
hand. 



— Co- 
lt must be your aim to return the service so that 
the ball will drop just as close as possible to the 
base line of your opponent's court. Don't try to 
return it too swiftly, for it takes a Renshaw to put 
great speed in the return, and yet cause the ball to 
strike within a few inches of the base line. You 
and I should be satisfied, at least until we have 
played longer, to strike near the base line, without 
attempting great speed. If you can place the ball 
close to either side line, and at the same time far 
back toward the base line, well and good; 3'ou are 
making a brilliant return. But djn't become too 
adventurous, for in the struggle to return the ball 
so close to so many lines, there is just a chance you 
may place it outside the court. 

And why is it so important to make your return 
fall close to the base line? First, because it em- 
barrasses your opponent in his stroke; and second, 
it gives 3'ou just so much more tim^ in which to 
follow your return by running toward the net. I 
know that almost all of our expert players agree in 
considering this of the utmost importance. You 
must start immediately after returning the service, 
and be firmly intrenched in j'our proper position 
between the net and service line b}^ the time the 
ball comes back. You will remember that I spoke 
of one contingency, and onl}?- one, in which it 
would not be proper to run to the net after the 
first return. This is when you see that your 
return is not well directed toward the base line, 
but will fall, perhaps, within the service line of 
your opponent's court. This must happen some- 
times to the best of players, and in such a case it be- 
comes so easy for 3'our adversary to place his return 



— 66 — 

on either side of you, if you are at the net, that 
discretion is distinctly "the better part of valor," 
and you will do well to retire to the back of the 
court and await another chance to run up. We 
can lay down no general rule to govern this play, 
but it is of such vital importance to reach the posi- 
tion at the net that I should advise you to run up 
even if your first return falls only eight or ten feet 
back of the service line. I may be wrong ; you 
certainly run great risk of being "passed," as it is 
called, but in this case I believe that the import- 
ance of the position sought for justifies the risk. 

Perhaps your opponent may be one of those who 
believe in sometimes running toward the net im- 
mediately after serving. If he tries it with you, 
don't become excited when you see him running 
up; keep cool, and you have him at your mercy. 
There are two plays you may make, either of which 
will bother him exceedingly. First, return the 
service down the side line. Do not seek for much 
speed in this return, for you must remember that 
your adversary is coming forward swiftly, and it is 
impossible for him to turn either to the right or 
left for more than a very short distance. If he is 
swiftly approaching the net through the middle of 
the court, a ball of moderate speed down the side 
line will be out of his reach. But watch him 
closely, and if he anticipates your stroke down the 
side, and so approaches the net along that side, 
then he must leave the remaining portion of the 
court unguarded, and as he runs up you can easily 
place the ball across the court in front of him, 
unless you lose your head at the approach of the 
enemy, and allow yourself to become " rattled." 



— 67 — 

I think that we have now covered nearly all of 
the points which arise when you are serving or 
receiving a service, and the rest of the set is mainly 
a repetition of. these points. Let us now consider 
the method of play generally, and if possible pick 
up one or two hints. And first, it seemn to me 
that the the importance of lobbing, or tossing, as 
it is more commonly called, is not sufficiently im- 
pressed upon the minds of beginners. They are 
apt to regard the tossing of the ball high in the air 
as "baby play," where is, in reality, it is one of the 
most important and effective strokes of the game. 
There are two kinds of lobs, and each, of course, is 
to be played only when your adversary is at the 
net. First, a low toss, which will go just over your 
opponent's head, and which you do not intend him 
to return; and second, a high one, which you may 
use when you wish to worry him, and test his en- 
durance by making him run to the back of the 
court to return the ball. The amount of exertion 
required to run to the back of the court, return 
the ball, and then go back to the net again at the 
first opportunity, must sooner or later exhaust the 
strongest of men, so that the importance of the 
lob, or toss, can be readily appreciated. 

A question often considered is the amount of 
practice which a player should have in order to 
show a steady improvement in his game. There is 
no doubt that practice up to a certain point is 
almost as important to a Lawn Tennis player as to a 
lawyer. But beyond that certain point it will not 
only not help to improve, but sometimes even cause 
him to fall off in his game. You have all heard of 
a player "growing stale," which means simply that 



— 68 — 

he has had too much playing. No general rule can 
be laid down, but you can at least keep your eyes 
open, and when you see that you have ceased to 
improve your game, stop playing for a time; give 
yourself a good rest, and then begin again. Above 
all, don't practice aimlessly, or merely with the 
idea of beating your opponent. Think of some 
points of play in which you wish particularly to 
improve, and practice those points. In other 
words, play with some method, and tr}^ hard to 
make the head a valuable assistant to the arm. 

And here it may not be improper to make one 
suggestion. In Lawn Tennis, more than in any 
other game, without doubt, is there opportunity for 
the courteous and considerate treatment of an ad- 
versary. Always bear this in mind; and then even 
if you lose the game, you will have the consolation 
of knowing that you are winning respect and popu- 
larity. 

PART II. 

TN order to show a steady improvement in an}^ 
•^ game, one must seek to overcome his most 
prominent faults and weaknesses. In Lawn Tennis 
particularly, there are many faults which are com- 
mon to all beginners. I shall now attempt to point 
out some of those faults, and if possible suggest 
proper remedies. 

And first let us consider what is ordinarily called 
"form." You have often heard a Lawn Tennis 
player spoken of as playing in "good form" or 
"bad form." I remember reading in Harpers 
Young People, about two years ago, an article on 
Lawn Tennis, in which the writer stated that " the 



— 69 — 

first thing to be cultivated or acquired by a young 
beginner is grace." We all agree upon this point, 
but I am afraid that 3^ou may misunderstand the 
meaning of the word "grace," lised in this sense. 
I take it that the writer did not mean that you 
should cultivate "grace" in your movements in 
order that you might win the admii'ation and ap- 
plause of spectators. If you cultivate grace for 
such a purpose, then you are cultivating a serious 
fault, for your game will surely lose in strength. 
But I know that the writer, in using the term 
"grace," meant something which I prefer to call 
"good form." As a Lawn Tennis player, you must 
cultivate "good form," which means, among other 
things, that you must endeavor to give a free 
and easy movement to the arm which holds the 
racket. Almost all beginners, and some who have 
played for years, are apt to use their arms just as 
if they had no elbow joints and no wrist joints. 
This is particularly noticeable in making a back- 
hand stroke. It is more than common to see 
players make this stroke with the arm perfectly 
straight and stiff; whereas, to make it correctly, 
both the elbow joint and the wrist joint should be 
given full play, and almost all of the work should 
be done by the wrist and forearm. The arm should 
be used somewhat as the elocution-master at school 
tries to teach you to use it in making gestures. 
Perhaps the best specimen of this " free-arm play," 
as it is called, is seen in the game of Thomas 
Pettitt, the professional Court Tennis player. If 
you could see him play, you would understand the 
method much better than I can now explain it. 
It is certainly a fact that every player, attempting 



— 70 — 

Lawn Tennis for the first time, finds that he is 
wofully weak in the backhand stroke. The fore- 
hand is a natural stroke; the backhand is an ac- 
quired one. This can hardly be called a fault; it 
is a weakness rather. Some players never over- 
come this weakness, while others, who are perhaps 
blessed with a very supple and strong wrist, are, 
with little practice, able to make the backhand 
stroke with the same dexterity and strength as the 
forehand. But why would it not be a good idea, 
when tossing the balls back and forth across . the 
net, as we so often do in practice, to ask the player 
on the other side of the net to place all the balls 
on your backhand ? Practice that stroke at every 
opportunity. Use that same easy swing of the 
arm, of which I have spoken, and 5^ou will soon 
notice an improvement in your backhand play. 
When I was at college I was once unfortunate 
enough to break my left arm while skating. With 
one arm securely bound in splints, life became 
rather wearisome, and being then even more en- 
thusiastic over Lawn Tennis than I am now, I 
removed all the pictures from one side of the room 
which I occupied in a college dormitor}^, and for 
an hour at a time practised backhand strokes 
against the wall. I don't believe that the practise 
caused my broken bones to knit together an}^ 
sooner, but what was of more importance, it cer- 
tainly did improve my backhand stroke. It will 
pay to practise this stroke as much as possible and 
improve it, as otherwise a cunning adversary will 
see your weakness, and place all the balls on your 
backhand. 

A beginner is rarely sufficiently aggressive or 



— 71 — 

courageous in his game. This is shown in a variety 
of ways, but most commonly, perhaps, by his disin- 
clination to run to the net when a good opportunity- 
offers; and this is a most serious fault. I suppose 
that the beginner is apt to fear that if he runs up, 
his opponent will drive the ball by him. But he 
should be more courageous. Even if he does once 
in a while lose a point by running up, he must 
remember that the advantages to be gained will 
more than compensate him in the end. He should 
always bear it in mind, just as if it were a rule of 
the game, that he must seize every reasonable op- 
portunity to run to the net. 

In playing at the net I think that a 3'oung player 
is apt to " smash " too much. He is likely to cherish 
the idea that he is not pla3ang well unless he 
smashes at everything. Now 3^ou will find that the 
steady and cool men are the ones who win most of 
the Tennis tournaments. One never saw Sears, 
who held the championship of this country for 
seven years, stand at the net and smash as hard as 
he could at every ball which crossed it. He very 
often purposely refrained from smashing the ball 
when he had almost a sure chance, and would 
rather place it so that his adversary, by hard run- 
ning, might just reach it, and exhaust himself in 
the struggle to continue the rally. I do not wish 
to be understood as advising you never to smash. 
Smash, and smash hard — for instance, when you 
are badly in need of one particular point. But 
instead of using the smash indiscriminatelyj as so 
many young players are apt to do, combine, with it 
a certain amount of prudence and care, bearing in 
mind that the plaver who at one moment makes a 



brilliant smash, and at the next knocks the ball into 
the net or twenty feet out of court, will never be 
able to beat his steady and careful adversary, 
although he may be superior to that adversary in 
actual skill. There is great opportunity for -using 
the head when you are playing at the net, and also 
for losing it. 

Continuing our search for faults, it seems to me 
that the beginner or young player is apt to drive 
too much and toss too little when playing in the 
back of the court. He seems to be continually 
hoping and expecting that he may drive the ball by 
the man at the net, and he is willing to hammer 
away at it with little method and less success, never 
thinking that it is just as simple and sometimes 
much more effective to toss the ball over the head 
of his adversary than to drive it by either side of 
him. He should drive less and toss more. He 
should realize that tossing is of great importance, 
and chiefl}' so because it gives him an opportunity 
to run to the net. And so, too, knowing that near 
the net is the proper place for him to be, as soon 
as he can safely get there, he should consider driv- 
ing as of less importance, inasmuch as it does not 
help him to reach the position at the net. 

Again, it is a great mistake, and one very com- 
monly made by old as well as young players, to 
take too many balls on a half-volley. 

There are occasions, it is true, when a half-volley 
becomes absolutely necessary — when, in fact, the 
stroke can be made in no other way. But there 
are many more occasions when the player couid 
easily volley the ball by stepping forward, and he 
does not do so simply because he yields to the 



perhaps natural temptation to make a pretty 
stroke. He may make the pretty stroke, but in 
nine cases out of ten it will be at the expense of 
losing the point, for only a very few of the most 
skillful players can half -volley with accuracy. 
When the average player attempts it, the chances 
are two to one that he has not the faintest idea of 
the direction the ball is going to take. It is to a 
certain extent a blind stroke, and should be avoided 
as much as possible. 

It is of the greatest importance to be able to 
change your style or method of play occasionally, 
in order that you may surprise and worry your 
adversary. I doubt if the majority of young 
players ever think of this point. They are apt to 
have but one method of play, and use it against all 
comers; whereas the pla}^er who uses his head is 
first careful to observe the methods and peculiari- 
ties of play of different men, and then attempts to 
play a game which may best resist the strong 
points of his opponent's method, and most effect- 
ively attack its weaknesses. If the player who 
" uses his head " thinks that a certain adversary is 
apt to become rattled and nervous when compelled 
to receive a great many lobs or tosses, then he will 
toss and continue to toss until he has rattled him. 
But if he knows that that same or some other op- 
ponent is particularly strong at smashing, then he 
will not toss at all, or certainly as little as possible. 
If he commences a tossing game, and finds, after 
playing for a time that it is not successful against 
a particular adversary, he will not obstinately con- 
tinue to toss simply because it has been successful 
against another, but he will rather change his 



method, even in the middle of the set, and try 
something which may be more effective. 

Endurance has now become an important factor 
in determining the result of a contest at Lawn 
Tennis. I know of no game, foot-ball not excepted, 
in which one is so likely to become exhausted or 
winded as in Lawn Tennis, when the game is hotly 
contested and played with spirit, as it should be. 
This being so, some attention should certainly be 
paid to training and cultivating powers of endur- 
ance. It is, of course, especially important to those 
who play in tournaments, which add so much to the 
attractiveness of and interest in the game. A hard- 
fought match of three sets out of five, on a hot 
summer's day, is a severe test of endurance, and of 
two men evenly matched in skill, the one who is in 
the best physical condition will surely win. 











■ 


K^'9 


teS! 


^S 




^1 


m^i2 


IV '^ 


!^^^ 


■^-^5^ ^ 


^^^^1 


wf^ 




^^H 




^Q 


L_ 











CHAPTER VI. 

THE DOUBLE GAME. 



" So the}' doubh' redoubled strokes upon the foe." 

—Macbeth. 

V\/ HILE there may be some difference of opinion 
as to whether a contestant in the single 
game should play at the net or in the back of the 
court, there can be no doubt as to which is the cor- 
rect policy in the double or four-handed game. 
Two players at the net will surely overpower two 
of equal skill at the base-line, and so it has become 
the distinctive feature of the modern double game 
that all four contestants seek to gain positions at 
the net, where every ball ma\^ be volleyed or 
smashed. In a trial between two teams of unequal 
strength, one rarely sees all four of the players near 
the net at the same time, for the stronger two 
show their superiority by beating back their adver- 
saries toward the base-line, where they have them 
at their mercy; but when teams of equal experience 



and skill come together, each resolutely maintains 
its position, and the repeated crack of the ball 
against the tightly strung rackets, as it is rapidly 
volleyed from one to another of the four players, 
almost reminds one of a volley of musketry. It is 
the rapidity and swiftness of the strokes which 
constitutes the charm of the double game, and 
renders it more attractive for the spectator than a 
contest in singles. 

Even in the old-fashioned double game, the ad- 
visability of playing one man at the net was recog- 
nized. While one of the two players remained at 
the base-line the other stood at one side of the 
court and almost over the net, ready to smash any 
poorly directed return. This system was then 
changed to the present, by placing the net man a few 
feet farther back and advancing his partner, who 
had formerly played at the base-line, to a point 
just as near the net. But how near to the net 
should this point be? This question presents 
about the only point in contention. Some think 
that both men should approach as close as possible 
to the net, while others hold that they should 
stand as much as ten feet away, where there is less 
danger that the ball will be driven between them 
or tossed over their heads. In referring to the 
single game, it was my opinion that the player 
should stand nearly midway between the service-line 
and the net. In the double game I think that both 
men should be nearer the net, for if the double 
court (36 feet in width) is divided into two equal 
parts, each man is obliged to cover a space only 18 
feet in width, while the single player must protect 
his whole court, 27 feet wide. And again, either 



— 79 — 

partner can easih- run to the back of the court 
and return a ball which has been tossed over the 
other's head. About six or seven feet from the net is 
the proper place, in my opinion, and neither part- 
ner should approach nearer, except of course to 
'■kill" or smash. 

It is of more importance than one might imagine, 
too, that both partners should stand at exactly the 
same distance from the net. If a line could be 
drawn across the court parallel to the net, each 
partner should stand with his feet touching it, for 
every step taken by either away from that line 
increases the distance between them, and of course 
makes a larger hole through which an adversary 
may shoot the ball. It follows, then, that when one 
player is compelled to move from this imaginary 
line, parallel to the net, the other should move also 
and in exactly the same direction. If one partner 
is forced toward the back of the court, the other 
should accompany him step for step. When the 
opportunity occurs for a return to the net, the sig- 
nal should be given, both should run forward at 
one and the same time, and both should stop at 
exactly the same distance from the net. Such is 
the ideal, the perfect double game; and this line, 
this parallel, should never be destroyed, except 
when one partner must run forward to smash, or 
run back to return a ball which has been tossed 
over the other's head. 

Up to this point we have been assuming that the 
players are in the midst of play or a rally, and we 
started by placing them on this parallel line near 
the net. But, prior to this, one of the players 
must liave been serving or receiving a service. Let 



— SO- 
US now go back, therefore, and consider the play 
from the beginning of a game. 

Whether your side is serving or receiving the 
service, the primary idea of yourself and partner 
must be to reach that line, six feet from the net, 
and the positions which you assume must be in ac- 
cordance with that idea. Let us first suppose that 
you are serving; and right here it is important to 
consider Avhether you should serve a very swift or a 
very slow ball, for the position to be taken by your 
partner depends upon the decision of this question. 
In considering the single game, you will remember 
that there was some doubt as to whether speed in 
the service was desirable. There is no such doubt 
in the double game, unless you wish to follow 3''our 
first service by running to the net, and in that case 
you should use one of the underhand twist serv- 
ices (Fig. 4, Chap. II.), or the slowest kind of an 
overhand service. Otherwise it pays to serve with 
just as much speed as possible, and without thought 
of economizing strength, in the hope that you may 
embarrass the striker-out in his return and compel 
him to give 3'our partner at the net a chance to 
smash. It has always been my own practice, in 
playing the double game, to serve my first service 
as swiftly as possible and to make no immediate 
attempt to run to the net, for it is almost impos- 
sible to recover from the violence of the exertion 
in time to reach the net before the return. • If my 
first service is a fault, I always run to the net on 
the second, taking care to serve so slowly, however, 
tnat I can cover the length of the court and reach, 
the net in time to voUcy the return of the striker- 
out. Some of the best double players, moreover, 



— 81 — 

often prefer to drop the swift service altogether, 
and to run to the net on a slow first service. 

Let us now return to a consideration of the posi- 
tions to be taken when you are serving. To sim- 
plify matters, let us call 3'ou and your partner A and 
B. If A intends to deliver a swift service, B should 
stand very close to the net and ready to smash, but 
he must also be careful to completely guard his 
side of the court. A should serve from a point on 
the base-line, well over toward the opposite side. 
If the first service is a fault, B should immediately 
drop back about six feet and assume a position a 
little nearer the center of the court than when he 
stood at the net. He should also take a position 
similar to that last described, if A intends to make 
his first service a slow one, or if his swift service is 
returned without giving a chance to smash. In 
now serving his slow service, A should remember 
to direct it toward the center line of the service 
court, as this allows B to cover more of the court 
toward the center, and gives A more opportunity 
to protect his own side as he runs toward the net. 
When A has arrived at a point where he is just as 
near the net as B, whether it is six, seven or eight 
feet, he should stop, and thereafter the movements 
of both should be made in unison, as before de- 
scribed. 

Now let us suppose that one of your adversaries 
is serving, and that A is to receive the service. If 
it happens to be one of the slow services, A can 
stand quite near the service-line to receive it, and 
should follow his return by immediately running 
to his position about six feet from the net. B 
should stand on the other side of the court, about 



six or seven feet from the net, while the service is 
being delivered, for it is reasonably sure that A 
will so return a slow service that your adversaries 
wnll have no chance to smash. But if it happens 
that the server has a very severe and speedy serv- 
ice, A must of course stand at or back of the base- 
line, and may give your adversary at the net a 
chance to smash. In this case, therefore, it seems 
to me good policy for B to stand as far back as 
the service-line, or, perhaps, farther, if the service 
is unusually swift; for at that distance from the 
net there is some chance that he may be able to 
return a smash, while it is practically impossible if 
he is only six feet away. As soon as B perceives 
that A has returned the service so that there is no 
chance for a smash, he should immediately run to 
his old position six feet from the net. If the 
swift service is a fault, he should likewise advance 
toward the net before the second service is de- 
livered. 

We have now studied about all of the positions 
which A and B are ordinarily called upon to as- 
sume during the progress of a game. It is well to 
add, however, that while this system of play, which 
I have described in such detail, is probably correct 
in theory, it will often be upset by any little cir- 
cumstance out of the ordinary. A general may 
carefully map out his campaign, only to find in the 
midst of it that some small but unexpected move- 
ment of the enemy must cause a temporary change 
in his plans. The old ideas are kept firmly in his 
mind, however, and every effort is directed toward 
a return to the original plan. And so here, while 
this system, as mapped out for A and B, may be 



— 83 — 

temporarily upset, the original idea of gaining the 
position at the net should be carefully remembered 
by both men and every effort should be directed 
toward that end. 

In returning a service it is best, as a general rule, 
to direct the ball toward the server, for he is usu- 
ally running toward the net, or has just completed 
the run, while his partner is standing still, alert, 
and ready to make a return. Assuming that the 
server is right-handed and that he is serving from 
the right side of the court, it is also best to direct 
your return toward the middle of the court, for the 
server will then be compelled to take the ball on 
his backhand as he runs toward the net; and if, in 
addition, you are once in a while successful in driv- 
ing the ball between the two men, you are doing 
great work, for there is nothing which can so thor- 
oughly rattle them and disorganize their team 
work. 

But, while these returns are best, as a general 
rule, it will not do to assume that they should be 
used continuously, for the main point of a strategic 
game of Lawn Tennis is to do exactly the opposite 
of that which your adversary expects. There is 
naturally more opportunity for such strategy in 
the single game, where one player is obliged to 
protect the whole court, 27 feet in width; but even 
in the double game, a moderate and well-timed 
variation of play is most effective. A very good 
illustration of this point is found in the policy 
which is usually adopted by double players who 
are well acquainted with the skill of their adver- 
saries. They select that one of the opposing team 
whom they consider to be the weaker, and make 



him the target for ever\' shot. But more often 
than not, it is found that the target is nerved to 
greater effort by such an attack, and a majority 
of the points are won by a sudden and quick 
stroke toward his partner, who is standing idly by 
and not expecting that he will be called upon to do 
an}- of the work. The wisdom of the policy lies 
not so much in attacking the weakness of one 
partner, as in surprising the strength of the other. 

In my own opinion, the use of any great amount 
of tossing or lobbing in the double game does more 
harm than good to the side using it. Many skillful 
double players, however, will differ with me upon 
this point. All agree as to the importance of toss- 
ing in the single game, but there it is used for at 
least one purpose, the importance of which is en- 
tirely absent in the double game. In singles, en- 
durance is a requisite of success, and the toss or 
lob is much used for the purpose of winding and 
weakening an adversary; but men of only average 
strength may play five or even more sets of doubles 
with but little effect upon wind or muscle. Only 
two reasons remain, then, for the use of the toss in 
the double game; first, because it may enable you 
to regain, the net after you have been driven to the 
back of the court; and second, because it varies 
your game and presents an additional element for 
your adversaries to meet. 

These two reasons are good ones, I grant, and 
justif}' a moderate or occasional use of the toss, 
but it must be remembered that there is alwavs 
one man at the net, and usually two, ready to 
pounce upon and smash any poorly lobbed ball; not 
a tired and worn out man. as in the single game. 



— 8-:; — 

but one with his muscles in good smashing condition. 
Add to this the fact that the court is 2,^ feet wide 
instead of 27, and it is readily seen that the point 
is almost surely lost, if the chance to smash is 
given. 

I should therefore advise the double player to 
toss as little as possible. A high toss is much 
harder to smash than a low one, and the latter 
should be used rarely, if at all. 

It is hardly proper to close this discussion with- 
out some reference to the importance of coolness 
and self-control in the make-up of the double 
player. All of the circumstances, which annoy the 
single player and cause him to lose his self-control, 
are likely to occur in the double game, and, in 
addition, each partner is continually called upon to 
exercise the greatest forbearance toward the other. 
Your partner may have a bad day, may make a 
series of unfortunate plays, may interfere with 
your strokes — in fact, may do everything wrong; 
but you must struggle hard to keep your temper, 
and do your own share of the work with more skill 
than ever. If you quarrel and fight among your- 
selves, you are sure to become rattled, and your ad- 
versaries will be encouraged to renewed effort. A 
cheerful word to the offender, or a laugh, will do 
more good than a growl. Many of us are able to 
give only the growl, and we know from experience 
how much harm it may do. 

The following hints, most of Avhich apply to the 
double game, were clipped from London "Pastime" 
a few years ago. They may be useful to so»ie 
players, but I should hardly care to recommend 
them for general adoption: 



— 8fi_ 

1. It is easier to call "fault" than to take a fast 
overhand serv'ce. 

2. It is never too late to say you were "not 
ready." 

3. Take every ball you can reach with any part 
of your racket. 

4. Having rushed at the ball and finding you 
cannot reach it, shout "yours" to your partner, 
who is generally to be seen in the most distant 
corner of the court. Then observe in a reproachful 
tone, "You know I can't take everything." 

5. When in doubt, abuse your partner. 

6. Always apologize to everybody about every- 
thing; it sometimes deceives the spectators into 
imagining you are capable of better things. 



G^ 




liss ADELINE K. ROBINSON. 




CHAPTER VII. 

LAWN TENNIS AS A GAME .FOR WOMEN.* 

"Nay, then, I see our wars 
Will turn into a peaceful comic sport, 
When ladies crave to be encounter d with." 

— King Henry /'/. 

YX seeking for exercise and recreation the athletic 
-*- man has a large field from which to choose his 
favorite sport. He may play Baseball, Football^ 
Lacrosse, Lawn Tennis, and many other games. 
How different it is with the athletic woman. She 
may ride and walk for exercise, it is true; she may 
row; she may, with perfect propriety, play at mask 
and foil; but when she tires of these and seeks for 
a game in which the elements of exercise and com- 
petition are combined, Lawn Tennis seems to be 
her only refuge. It is the one athletic game which 
a woman can enjoy without being subjected to 
sundr}' insinuations of rompishness, and it is de- 



* Orig-inally published in " Outing 
mission from that magazine. 



of July, i88g, and reprinted by per- 



-90- 

cidedly unfortunate for the physical development 
of woman that she cannot attain the highest success 
even in this, her one sport, without becoming the sub- 
ject of ill-natured criticism. In the opinion of some 
just and impartial critics, the woman who is unfor- 
tunate enough to defeat all others "pla3''s just like 
a man," "is too ungraceful for anything," etc. But 
we of the other sex and, to their credit, the majority 
of her own, admire the woman who, for the time be- 
ing, is unconscious of her personal appearance and 
bravely struggles against the awful handicap im- 
posed upon her, viz., much dress and little strength. 
The physical superiority of the English women to 
those of most other nations is well known to be due 
to the greater amount of exercise which they take; 
and the English girl plays Lawn Tennis much 
better than the American simply because she is 
physically her superior, and can more easily handle 
a racket of adequate weight. 

It must be conceded that Lawn Tennis is a game 
wonderfully well fitted to be a medium of exercise 
for women. It may be played violently or it may 
be played gently, entirely at the option of the con- 
testants. Already attractive simply as a game, it 
is rendered so much more so by the addition of 
tournament playing, that the interest never flags, 
but rather increases. And right here lies the 
greatest danger. The average male contestant in a 
tournament is anxious to win, and willing to exert 
himself to a considerable extent to that end, but it 
appears to be a feature peculiar to a tournament 
for ladies that each and every participant is thor- 
oughly imbued with the idea that she is destined to 
win, and the violence of her efforts to avert defeat 



— 91 — 

causes the game to become a harmful rather than a 
beneficial exercise. It may be said, somewhat para- 
doxically perhaps, that Lawn Tennis, although a 
good game for ladies, is not a "ladies' game," as 
some sarcastic people were once wont to call it. It 
is a game which, when too violently played, be- 
com.es as severe a strain upon the muscles and pro- 
duces as serious an effect upon the action of the 
heart and lungs as any of the most exhausting of 
athletic sports — a fact which will be attested by 
any man who has played Lawn Tennis as well as 
Baseball, Football or Lacrosse. 

And now let us consider the equipments which 
are necessary for the practice of the game. In the 
first place, what should be the weight and shape of 
a racket to be used by a woman of ordinary 
strength? As to shape, popular opinion has now 
united on the one style, which common sense 
would dictate to be the correct one: the racket 
with the straight head, which is now manufactured 
by almost all of the dealers in tennis goods. But 
the weight of the racket is an important consider- 
ation. A man of ordinary strength should, in the 
opinion of the most skillful players, use a racket 
weighing from thirteen and a half to fourteen and 
a half, or at the most fifteen ounces. The weight 
to be used by a woman might also in some cases be as 
high as fourteen ounces, for it is well known that 
some women have more power in their wrists than 
the average man, and the wrist plays an important 
part in the wielding of a racket. It is probable, 
however, that the correct weight to be used by the 
woman of ordinary strength is from twelve to thir- 
teen and a half ounces, and it may be asserted 



— 92 — 

positively that she should not use a racket of less 
weight than twelve ounces, for the s^ze and weight 
of the ball are, of course, uniform, and any racket 
of less weight than twelve ounces is incapable of 
resisting and returning a ball propelled with any 
great degree of force. 

The danger of slipping on a smooth turf court 
and spraining an ankle or a knee is so great, that 
much care should be exercised in the selection of 
shoes. It has been found that the ordinary rubber 
sole will not always prevent slipping, and small 
steel or iron pegs have been commonly used by 
men during the past few years. The necessity 
would appear to be greater in the case of a woman, 
who labors under the extra disadvantage of having 
a skirt dangling about her feet. The use of the 
pegs will very often avert a serious accident and 
really do no more injury to the turf than the ordi- 
nary rubber sole. 

As to other items of dress, it is undoubtedly 
presumptuous for man to advise or suggest. But 
in view of the statement already made, that Lawn 
Tennis, when violently played, is most exhausting, 
it is perhaps pardonable, and certainly pertinent, to 
quote a paragraph from Dr. Sargent's article on 
'' The Physical Development of Women," which ap- 
peared in Scribners Magazine of February, 1889. 
The paragraph in question reads as follows, and 
the moral is too plain to be drawn: 

"In order to ascertain the influence of tight 
clothing upon the action of the heart during ex- 
ercise, a dozen young women consented this sum- 
mer to run 540 yards in their loose gymnasium gar- 
ments, and then to run the same distance with cor- 



— on- 
sets on. The running time was 2m. 30s. for each 
trial, and, in order that there should be no cardiac 
excitement of depression following the test, the sec- 
ond trial was made the following day. Before be- 
ginning the running the average heart impulse 
was eighty-four beats to the minute; after running 
the above-named distance the heart impulse was 
152 beats to the minute, the average natural waist 
girth being twenty-five inches. The next day cor- 
sets were worn during the exercise, and the average 
girth of waist was reduced to twenty-four inches. 
The same distance was run in the same time by all, 
and immediatel}^ afterward the average heart im- 
pulse was found to be 168 beats per minute. When 
I state that I should feel myself justified in advis- 
ing an athlete not to enter a running or rowing 
race whose heart impulse was 160 beats per min- 
ute after a little exercise, even though there were 
not the slightest evidence of disease, one can form 
some idea of the wear and tear on this important 
organ, and the physiological loss entailed upon the 
system in women who force it to labor half their 
lives under such a disadvantage as the tight corset 
imposes." 

When we begin our practise of the game, our 
first thought, of course, is of how to improve in 
skill. It is true that many appear to be perfectly 
satisfied with batting the ball back and forth across 
the net with as little exertion as possible, but the 
natural impulse of the American, whether man or 
woman, is to reach the highest degree of excellence 
in whatever he or she undertakes. In considering 
improvement in Lawn Tennis, the first thought 
Avhich occurs to the mind is that woman, as com- 



— 94 — 

pared with man, labors under at least two serious 
disadvantages — first, her manner of dress, and, sec- 
ond, her lack of muscle, endurance or lung power 
and other qualities, all of which we will unite and 
call by one term — strength. 

Her disadvantages, then, are manner of dress and 
lack of strength, and in seeking to improve, it must 
be her aim to make these disadvantages of as little 
effect as possible. It is obvious that the wearing 
of a long and flowing skirt not only seriously inter- 
feres with quick movements from one part of the 
court to another, but what is of still more import- 
ance, it prevents a woman from using her racket 
and making the stroke in a correct manner, or, 
as it is more commonly called, in "good form." 
There is a right way and a wrong way to make a 
Lawn Tennis stroke, just as there is a correct 
method and incorrect method of using a bat in 
baseball or cricket. A baseball player is taught by 
the master of good form that he must meet the ball 
squarely, with his bat held in a horizontal position, 
while the cricketer is instructed that he must guard 
his wicket by holding and using his bat in a per- 
pendicular line; and so, in order to play in "good 
form," the Lawn Tennis player, in returning the 
ball from a bound, must make the stroke with the 
arm in as nearly a perpendicular line as possible, 
and not with the round-arm movement so com- 
monly seen. To be more explicit, the player must 
station himself or herself sufficiently far back to 
meet the ball on its descent from the bound, assum- 
ing, of course, that there is time to take that 
position, and the stroke should be made when the 
ball has nearly reached the ground for a second 



— 95 — 

time, the arm then being stretched to its full length 
and moving freely in a line parallel with the body 
(Chapter III., page 37). 

It being conceded that the stroke just described 
is the correct one, both from a scientific and com- 
mon sense point of view, it is easy to see that a 
woman is serioush^ embarrassed in adopting the 
correct method, for if she attempt to make the 
stroke with her arm close to and parallel with her 
body, the chances are about even that either the 
ball or her racket will become entangled in, or at 
least interfered with by, the folds of her skirt. In 
fact, it is quite impossible for her to make a stroke 
in the manner described. Now can anything be 
done to overcome this disadvantage ? The most 
obvious remedy that suggests itself is that she 
should take a less number of balls on the bound, 
or, in other words, that she should learn to volley. 
Volleying is a feature of Lawn Tennis which per- 
haps no women, or certainly very few of them, 
appear to have mastered, and the one who first 
attains proficiency in this branch of the game will 
have a decided advantage over her opponents. To 
volley well requires strength, a lack of which is 
one of the two disadvantages under which woman 
labors; but, on the other hand, is it not sometimes 
a saving of strength if one can run to the net and 
by one well-directed volley put an end to a rall)^ 
which may be prolonged to an almost indefinite 
length, if each contestant remains in the back of 
the court and takes ball after ball on the bound? 
Such protracted rallies are terribly exhausting, and 
any woman who has the strength to endure them 
must also have strength enough to volley well. 



— 9G — 

Many devotees of Lawn Tennis will remember with 
much pleasure the numerous exciting matches be- 
tween Miss Robinson and Miss Roosevelt during 
the summer of 1888. In some of these, notably the 
Narragansett Pier Tournament, there were rallies 
in which the ball crossed the net more times than 
in any contest between men which I have wit- 
nessed. The sight was of course a pretty one, and 
it was the kind of playing sure to provoke un- 
limited enthusiasm among the spectators; but as 
an expert Lawn Tennis player watched the ball fiy 
back and forth across the net time after time, he 
could not but feel an inclination to step into the 
court, run to the net, and with one vigorous 
"smash" put an end to the exhaustive rally. 

If it be once granted that volleying requires no 
more strength than is necessary to endure these 
long rallies, there is no reason why a woman 
should not learn to volley with skill and precision, 
and when she has once mastered that art she will 
very seldom be annoyed by her manner of dress. 

It may be doubted that women can attain profi- 
ciency in that branch of volleying which we call 
"smashing the ball," and yet there is no unanswer- 
able reason why she should not. A "smash" may 
be made by exerting the strength of the whole 
arm or that of the wrist. Thomas Pettitt, the 
well-known professional player, almost invariably 
"smashes" by a mere movement of the wrist, and 
there is no lack of power in his "smashes." In 
addition to being a much more graceful stroke, it 
is more deceptive than a "smash" in which the 
whole arm is used, for an adversary is less likeh^ 
to know where you intend to place the ball. It 



is well known that some women are blessed with 
wrists of steel, and that the Avrists of the majority 
of the sex are of much more power, as compared 
with those of men, than other parts of the body. 
It does not seem impossible, then, that a woman 
should be able to " smash," and '' smash " effectivel)^, 
too. 

But can she learn to "smash," voile}', and play 
all of the other difficult strokes of La\\n Tennis 
without sacrificing a certain amount of grace ? 
The question is a serious one, for if women become 
imbued with the idea that they must lose the grace 
natural to their sex and take on the avv^kwardness 
of man, in the same proportion that they show im- 
provement or approach perfection in the game, it 
would be difficult to persuade them to take that 
active interest which is always inspired b)^ a desire 
to excel in any sport, and Lawn Tennis would be 
deprived of that feature which has distinctly 
marked it as the most refined and unprofessional 
of all athletic games. Fortunately the question 
may fairl}- be answered in the affirmative. 

It is the universal desire of Lawn Tennis players 
to play in "good form." It is hard to give a defi- 
nition of "good form," but one of its chief requi- 
sites is to give a free and easy swing to the arm in 
making a stroke. To play in "good form " means 
to pla}^ gracefully, for grace is necessary to "good 
form." It is very seldom that one sees a b'eginner 
in Lawn Tennis who does not make the strcke-s 
with his arm cramped and stiffened. He plays in 
"bad form," and it is onl)'" after long experience 
and practice that he acquires the easy movements 
necessar}' to "good form." And so a woman, Avho 



— 93 — 

in the first attempts is even more awkward than a 
man, will find that her movements will become 
more easy and graceful the more that she plays 
and the more that she learns of the game, while 
the very confidence which proceeds from a con- 
sciousness of one's improvement in skill is often an 
important element of grace. 

There is one stroke in which the gentler sex 
plainly excels, and that is "lobbing" or "tossing." 
The explanation probably lies in the fact that the 
stroke is itself a gentle one, requiring delicacy and 
deftness, rather than strength, for its proper exe- 
cution. I have seldom seen any lobbing by expert 
men players which would compare in effectiveness 
with that of Miss Robinson or Miss Roosevelt in 
some of the matches in doubles which they played 
during the summer of 1888. It was in doubles 
that they were allowed the greatest opportunity 
for an exhibition of such skill, for in their single 
matches each contestant almost uniformly played 
in the back of the court, and the "lob" or "toss" 
is used only when an opponent is playing at the 
net. The importance of this stroke is often under- 
estimated by men, who w^ould find their playing 
much improved if they used it more often, or were 
able to make it with greater skill. 

The fact that a woman can probably " lob " or 
" toss " with a skill equal to that of an expert man 
would seem to operate as an argument against the 
advice already given, viz., that she should learn to 
volley and pla)'' at the net, for if a ball is tossed 
over her head it is much more difficult for her to 
turn quickly and run to the back of the court, and 
it might be pleaded in addition that her limited 



— 99 — 

powers of endurance would not always be sufficient 
to stand the strain. To this it may be answered 
that the position at the net is considered by the 
most experienced players to be such a commanding- 
one, and of such vital importance to success, that 
it is worth incurring almost any risk to secure it. 
The ball may often be tossed over your head, just 
as it may frequently be driven down one of the side 
lines; but it is believed that, in spite of such re- 
verses, more is to be gained in the end by sturdily 
maintaining your stand at the net and awaiting a 
good opportunity to ''kill " the ball. 

It can hardly be stated with perfect fairness that 
the future of Lawn Tennis is certain. It is com- 
paratively a new game,, although evolved from a 
succession of old ones, and while it has made more 
progress during the past few years, so far as num- 
ber and enthusiasm of followers are concerned, 
than any other game, it is not yet certain that it 
will endure the test of time, or that it will not 
prove to be one of those games which enjoy popu- 
lar favor for a decade and then become almost 
a reminiscence. Many will remember the time 
when Croquet had its thousands of players, and 
almost every lawn was laid out with stakes and 
wickets. Now the resounding thwack of the Cro- 
quet mallet and ball is no longer heard in the land. 
The game is still played, it is true, but as a popu- 
lar pastime it has long faded from public view. It- 
is hardly fair to compare Lawn Tennis with Cro- 
quet, for, although the latter possesses many agree- 
able features, it is not sufficiently active to be 
called an athletic game and used as a sole medium 
of exercise, nor will an impartial critic hold that it 



— 100 — 

possesses the merit of Lawn Tennis, when viewed 
purely as a means of amusement. It is unquestion- 
able, however, that the athletic world is fickle ; it 
has an enormous appetite for novelty, and each 
successive generation, as a matter of course, desires 
to be served with a new kind of game. And so it 
is possible that Lawn Tennis may some time lose 
the place it now holds in popular favor. It is at 
present protected by one very important circum- 
stance, which exists in the fact that here is a game 
which man and woman alike may enjoy as a pas- 
time and emplo}' as a means of recreation. Let 
Lawn Tennis retain the active interest of the fair 
sex, and there is every reason to believe that it. is 
assured a great and an abiding popularity. 



PART II. 

THE GAME AS IT HAS i5££A^ PLAYED. 



o rn 

> CO 





CHAPTER I. 

THE INTRODUCTION AND EARLY HISTORY 
OF THE GAME. 



ENNIS and Lawn Tennis are two games which 
are not infrequently confused. The former is 
played in an indoor court of special and com- 
plicated construction. The surrounding walls are 
joined together at various angles, and the floor, 
upon which the players stand, is marked with a 
number of lines, which are called chaces. This is 
the game which was played hundreds of years ago, 
a fact which is established by the references of 
many noted writers. Shakespeare, for instance, 
puts the following metaphor in the mouth of King 
Henry V., upon the occasion of his receiving a 
present of some tennis balls from the Dauphin: 

" When we have match' d our rackets to these balls, 
We will, in France, by God's grace, play a set 
Shall strike his father's crown into the hazard. 
Tell him he hath made a match with such a wrangler, 
That all the courts of France shall be disturb'd 
With chaces." 



— KIG — 

These lines are evidence, not only that Tennis 
must have been widely played in both England and 
France during that period, but also that it was a 
game well entitled to be called " the sport of kings." 

It is this confusion of the two games which has 
led some to believe that Lawn Tennis is an ancient 
game. Lawn Tennis is undoubtedly a product or an 
evolution of those ancient sports, such as Tennis 
and Rackets, but the game itself is distinctly 
modern. It was the first game of that class (unless 
the comparatively unimportant sport called Battle- 
dore and Shuttlecock be considered) which was 
played out of doors, and it was for that reason, 
more than any other, that it became immediately 
so popular and widely played. 

The game attracted very little attention in the 
United States, however, until about 1880, and at 
that time but few people were aware of the fact 
that in the neighborhood of Boston it had been 
actively and, all things considered, skilfully plaj'ed 
since 1874. In view of the frequent assertions that 
the game was not introduced in this country until 
1878 or 1879, it may be interesting to know exactly 
when and by whom the first set of Lawn Tennis 
was imported from England. 

After careful investigation, it seems to be well es- 
tablished that the distinction belongs to a gentle- 
man of Boston, who purchased the set in England, 
more as a curiosity than anything else, and brought 
it to this country in the summer of 1S74. The 
court was laid out and the set was first used at 
Nahant, a summer resort a few miles from Boston, 
in the month of August, 1874. The rackets were 
awkward in shape, and much lighter than those 



— 107 — 

now in use; the balls were of uncovered rubber, 
similar to the to}' balls with wliich children play, 
and the net was about five feet in height. Dr. 
James Dwight and Mr. F. R. Sears, Jr., were the 
first to use these crude materials, and those gen- 
tlemen were undoubtedly the pioneers of the game 
in the United States. Dr. Dwight has since become 
famous as a player, both at home and abroad, but Mr. 
Sears abandoned the game before it had become at 
all widely known. He was an elder brother of Mr. 
R. D. Sears, well known as the champion of the 
United States for seven successive years, and who 
has often said that his elder brother would have 
been a better player than himself had he not been 
obliged to discontinue practice at such an early 
day. It is possible that there was a large streak of 
Lawn Tennis in the Sears blood, but it is more likely 
that the skill afterwards shown by Mr. R. D. Sears 
was due to the instruction of his brother and Dr. 
Dwight, and to his observance of their methods. 

Some time in the summer of 1874, another set 
was brought to this country b}' Mr. W. W. Sherman, 
of Newport, but it was not until the following spring 
that a court was laid out. It was in the summer of 
1875, therefore, that the game was first played at 
Newport, a city which has since been the scene of 
many memorable encounters. 

The two courts already mentioned were laid out 
on private grounds, and it remained for the Staten 
Island Cricket and Base Ball Club to first adopt 
Lawn Tennis as a club sport. Mr. E. H. Outer- 
bridge, of Staten Island, was the fortunate possessor 
of a set, and also a prominent member of the Staten 
Island Club. A num.ber of Englishmen, who were 



— 108 — 

more or less familiar with the game in their own 
country, were also members and eager to play. 
Mr. Outerbridge therefore obtained the permission 
of the club authorities, in the summer of 1875, to 
plant his Lawn Tennis seed in a modest corner of 
the grounds. That the seed sprouted and the 
plant thrived will be demonstrated by a visit to the 
grounds of this same club on any afternoon of the 
summer months. 

It is quite safe to assume that numerous matches 
were played both at Staten Island and Nahant in 
the summer of 1875, but no accurate records can 
be found, as the newspapers then paid no attention 
to the sport. In 1876, however, we have an au- 
thentic record of the first tournament played in the 
United States. It was a local affair, held on a pri- 
vate court at Nahant, and as Dr. Dwight and Mr. 
F. R. Sears, Jr., were plainly superior to the re- 
mainder of the players, it became necessary to 
make it a handicap. The scoring v/as done ac- 
cording to the method employed in Rackets, each 
player serving until he lost a point, and fifteen 
points constituting a game. It was quite common 
for a good player, after winning the toss for serv- 
ice, to serve out the game, scoring fifteen points in 
succession. Dr. Dwight and Mr. Sears were of 
course placed at scratch, and the remaining thir- 
teen contestants were allowed large handicaps. 
Dr. Dwight won the tournament, but only after 
the hardest kind of a battle with Mr. Sears. 

The following year, 1877, saw a repetition of this 
local handicap. This time Mr. F. R. Sears, Jr. did 
not compete, but the tournament is particularly in- 
terestintr to us inasmuch as it was the occasion for 



— 109— 

the first appearance of Mr. R. D. Sears, then a boy 
of fifteen years. It is recorded that R. D. Sears 
was allowed a handicap of eleven points by Dr. 
Dwight, and was defeated by a score of fifteen 
points to eleven, or in other words, the future 
champion failed to score a point, while Dr. Dwight 
was rolling up fifteen. Nine points were conceded 
to Mr. A. L. Rives, and this was the smallest handi- 
cap allowed by Dr. Dwight, who Avas, of course, 
again placed at scratch. Mr. Rives is the same 
gentleman whose name will be found among the 
contestants in the - championship tournaments 
played at Newport in 1888 and 1889. It is perhaps 
unnecessary to add that Dr. Dwight won this 
handicap even more easily than the one of the 
year previous. 

Still another tournament was played at Nahant 
in the following summer, 1878, and it was interest- 
ing for several reasons. For the first time the present 
method of scoring, which had previously been used 
only in Court Tennis, was adopted. It was once 
more a handicap, and Dr. Dwight was placed at 
scratch, but this time not alone. Two players, 
Messrs. Shaw and Peabody, appear to have been 
considered Avorthy to be classed with the redoubt- 
able Doctor, but inasmuch as he succeeded in de- 
feating both, there seems to be no reason for doubt- 
ing that he was then the most skillful player of our 
own country. It would be too much to saj^, how- 
ever, that he had no superior in the United States, 
for it is more than probable that there were several 
visiting Englishmen who had learned enough of 
the game in their own country to enable them to 
concede odds to our best players. 



— 110 — 

But the most interesting feature of the 1878 
tournament, at least to players of the present time, 
was the opportunity it afforded for another com- 
parison of the playing merits of Dr. Dwight and 
Mr. R. D. Sears. The Doctor conceded to his 
pupil odds of thirty and three bisques, and in addi- 
tion gave him a sound beating. For the benefit of 
those who are unfamiliar with the value of bisques, 
it may be said that a handicap of thirty and three 
bisques amounts in value to considerably more 
than half forty. It can readily be seen, then, that 
during the year 1878 the embryo champion was so 
far behind his teacher that the pursuit must have 
seemed hopeless. 

We have no record of any events of importance 
occurring during the year 1879, but it is nevertheless 
certain that Lawn Tennis must have taken a long 
stride forward in popular favor, for at the very be- 
ginning of the following year, interest in the game, 
which had before been confined to a few, now be- 
came general. Many were disposed to ridicule the 
sport as one suitable only for women and weak 
men, and the rougher element were more or less 
prone to jeer at the white flannel trousers and 
knickerbockers, but when the strongest athletes 
among the Cricketers and Base Ball players found 
something in the game to amuse them, the jeers 
and sneers were in a measure silenced. 

The press, too, about this time began to pay 
some attention to the new game, but treated it 
rather as a freak of fashion or a successor to Cro- 
quet, which had been extremely popular, but was 
then dying a rather rapid death. Some of the 
articles which appeared in the daily newspapers 



— Ill- 
must be very amusing to the players of to-day. 
The following is a fair sample of the Lawn 
Tennis journalism of those times. It is a quota- 
tion from an article published in a Philadelphia 
paper, and refers to a tournament which was 
played at least a year later than the time which we 
are now considering, but it indicates very plainly 
that the knowledge of the press and the general 
public, upon the subject of Lawn Tennis, must 
have been extremely slight during this whole 
period: 

"Fine weather having made it possible for the devotees of 
the fashionable diversion of Lawn Tennis to adjourn from 
indoor practice to the enlarged freedom of out-of-door par- 
ticipation in the game, the sport has just begun to blossom 
out in full favor, and, as a sort of inauguration of the season, 
a "tournament" of skilled players took place yesterday near 
Wayne Junction, at " Stenton," the picturesque grounds of 
the Young America Cricket Club. There were two kinds of 
sets played, the "single," in which one man on each side of 
the net fought the balls of the other, and the "double," in 
which were two players on each side. All the players wore 
Tennis suits, some of them with brightly striped jackets and 
caps, and more entirely of white, while the majority wore 
tight fitting knee breeches and long colored stockings. . . . 
In the drawings, Lindiey Johnson drew a "bye," so that he did 
not participate in the single games. The playing in all these 
games was very pretty. Van Rensselaer's performances 
were occasionally beautiful, and he was most dexterous 
throughout, although Thayer, his competitor, excels him in 
grace. Dr. Dwight has a rolling sailor's gait, and a sort of 
grocer's sugar-scoop dip with his racket, but when he 
touches the ball it seems to obey his will, and goes irresis- 
tibly back to where it came from. His playing won the ad- 
miration of all. Especially in the difficult matter of "serv- 
ing" the ball to his adversary, he displayed the very highest 
qualities requisite to the best playing of the game." 



— 11'^ — 

But notwithstanding all this, Lawn Tennis was 
destined to prosper. Until the year 1880, all tour- 
naments and matches had been local affairs similar 
to those which have been mentioned as occurring at 
Nahant. Consequently players in one part of the 
country were entirely unfamiliar, not onh' with the 
skill of those living in another section, but also with 
the rules, etc., which governed their play. The Young 
America Cricket Club, of Philadelphia, had taken 
to the game with enthusiasm ; the members of the 
Staten Island Cricket and Base Ball Club were 
playing it more and more, and Dr. Dwight and 
Mr. Sears had a host of followers in the neighbor- 
hood of Boston. In each of these localities, how- 
ever, the play was governed by rules which differed 
widely in some important particulars. Each club 
had a kind of "go as you please" method of its own. 
It is not surprising, then, that the first meeting of 
the representative players of the country produced 
some confusion and quite a little feeling. 

Early in the summer of 1880, the Staten Island 
Cricket and Base Ball Club threw open its gates 
for the first open tournament held in the United 
States. Any player in the country was privileged 
to enter, and the winner was to be declared the 
Champion of America, Both singles and doubles 
were played. The singles were won by Mr. O. E. 
Woodhouse, a celebrated English player, who hap- 
pened to be in New York at this time. Although 
Mr. Woodhouse was then, without doubt, by far 
the best player in the United States, it would be 
hardly proper to award him the title of champion 
for the year 1880, inasmuch as other tournaments 
were given by various clubs during the same sum- 



— 113 — 

mer and each was declared to be for the champion- 
ship. 

It was the double event, however, which had the 
greatest effect upon the development of Lawn Ten- 
nis in this country, for it was marked by a disagree- 
ment which plainly showed the necessit)^ of a cen- 
tral power or body, which should frame a code of 
rules to be used by all players alike. Messrs. 
Dwight and Sears were entered in the doubles, and 
upon their arrival from Boston, found that the balls 
which were used in the tournament play were not 
more than two-thirds of the size of an English 
ball, which they had continually used in practice, 
and to which they were thoroughly accustomed. 
The two balls also differed materially in weight. The 
Boston men protested that the tournament balls 
were not regulation, either in weight or size, but 
the tournament committee answered by pointing 
to the word "Regulation," which was stamped in 
bold letters upon the balls. Dwight and Sears 
were therefore obliged to play with the balls which 
were offered, or not play at all. They chose the 
former alternative, and Avere easily defeated by a 
New Jersey team, Messrs. Wood and Maning. 
The experience was valuable, however, for it con- 
stituted the first step toward the formation of the 
United States National Lawn Tennis Association. 

A short time after the events just mentioned, a 
tournament was held at Newport, R. I. It Avas a 
local affair, the entries being limited to members of 
the Casino, but it attracted attention to the advan- 
tages of the place, and led to its being selected for 
the championship meeting of the National Associa- 
tion in the following year. 



- 114 — 

It v/as in the autumn of 1880, however, that a 
match was played, which materially hastened the 
formation of an association. The Young America 
Cricket Club, of Philadelphia, having quite a num- 
ber of expert players among its members, decided 
to challenge the Staten Island Cricket and Base 
Ball Club to play a four-handed match. The chal- 
lenge was accepted, and the match was played at 
Philadelphia. The Young America Club was repre- 
sented by Mr. C. M. Clark, an elder brother of Mr. 
J. S. Clark, and Mr. F. W. Taylor, whose name is 
still seen among the entries in the championship 
tournaments at Newport.^, The Staten Island team, 
Messrs. J. S. Rankine and W. M. Donald, won the 
match, but only after a desperate contest. 

The result would have been unsatisfactory, how- 
ever, no matter which side had gained the victory, for 
the ball question again provoked a dispute, and the 
matter was further complicated by a difference of 
opinion in regard to the proper height of the net. 
The Philadelphia men had taken all of their practice 
with the net at a height of three feet and six inches 
at the center, while the Staten Islanders were ac- 
customed to a net measuring three feet at the cen- 
ter and three feet and six inches at the ends. A 
difference of six inches at the center of the net was 
perhaps of more importance then than it would be 
at the present day; at least it would so appear 
from a consideration of the style of play then in 
vogue. 

During all these years it had been customary for 
the players, in both the single and four-handed 
games, to stand at the back of the court, in the 
neighborhood of the base line, and receive every 



- 115 — 

ball on the bound. Such a thing as running 
to the net was unheard of, at least in the single 
game, and anj- good volleying was so rare as to 
cause an exclamation of astonishment from an 
adversary, and profound admiration from a spec- 
tator. Lobbing or tossing, as practised at the pres- 
ent time, was unknown, for no one played at the 
net, and there was therefore no occasion for any such 
art. The theory of their game was to drive the 
ball swiftly, and at the same time close to the top of 
the net. But the nets which were used generally 
throughout the country, except at Staten Island, 
and possibly at Boston, measured four feet in 
height at the ends, and it was difficult to send a 
ball with much speed over four feet of net, and still 
cause it to fall within the lines, especially since the 
player of those days had no knowledge of the 
scientific drop stroke, which is now used so 
efifectively. It was onl)^ natural, then, that a ma- 
jority of the returns were directed toward the cen- 
ter of the net, where it measured only three feet 
and six inches. It follows, too, that a difference of 
six inches at the center was decidedly material, and 
the discussion which had arisen between the 
Staten Island and the Philadelphia players was 
bound to be renewed so long as there was no cen- 
tral power which had the authority to determine 
the proper height of the net, and settle other mat- 
ters then in dispute. 

But all of these tournaments and matches, which 
were played during 1880, had attracted the atten- 
tion of many who had hitherto been indifferent to 
the game. The formation of an Association was 
earnestly urged by the prominent players, foremost 



— liG — 

among whom was Dr. Dwight, and finally a call for 
a general meeting was issued in the names of the 
following: The Beacon Park Athletic Association 
of Boston, the Staten Island Cricket and Base Ball 
Club of New York, and the All Philadelphia Lawn 
Tennis Committee, the latter being composed of 
representatives of all prominent Cricket clubs of 
Philadelphia. The meeting was held at the Fifth 
Avenue Hotel, in New York City, on the 21st of 
May, t88i. As many as thirty-three Clubs were 
represented. A Constitution and By-laws for an 
Association, to be called the United States National 
Lawn Tennis Association, were adopted, and Mr. 
R. S. Oliver, of the Albany Lawn Tennis Club, 
was chosen as the first President. Mr. C. M. Clark 
was elected Secretary and Treasurer, and three 
other gentlemen were selected, who, together with 
the officers, were to constitute an Executive Com- 
mittee. The matters in dispute during the pre- 
vious year were thoroughly discussed, and it was 
decided to adopt the rules of the Marylebone 
Cricket Club and the All England Lawn Tennis 
Club for the ensuing year. It has since been the 
policy of the Association, in the exercise of its 
power to make, revise and interpret the playing 
rules, to follow the English rules except in a very 
few instances where it was manifest that a change 
would improve the game. 

The Association also voted to hold a champion- 
ship tournament during the summer, the winners 
in both the Singles and Doubles to be called the 
champions of the United States. The Executive 
Committee afterwards met and agreed that these 
championships should be decided at Newport, R. I. 



The English ball made by Ayres was adopted as 
the regulation ball to be used in the United States, 
The power and authority of the National Associa- 
tion was at once recognized throughout the country, 
and the very commencement of its career was 
marked by a prosperity which has since been 
uninterrupted. 



:M?m»m, 



^Mmmm 




CHAPTER II. 

THE CHAMPIONSHIPS OF THE U. S. N. L. T. A. 
SINGLES. 

'^''T^URING the spring and early summer of iSSi, 
^-^ an interesting series of matches, most im- 
portant in their eifect upon the styX^ of play then in 
vogue, were played by Messrs. Dwight and Sears. 
Mr. Sears had been rapidly improving in skill dur- 
ing the previous year, and at its end was in close 
rivalry with Dr. Dwight for the honor of being con- 
sidered the best native player. The Doctor, how- 
ever, still remained slightly the better. Just before 
play was resumed in the spring of 1 88 1 , Mr. Sears, 
in casting about for ways and means to get the better 
of his rival, determined to try the experiment of plaj'- 
ing at the service line, instead of at the base line, as 
described in the last chapter. The change was a 
radical one, for in the old game nearl}^ every ball 
was taken on the bound, while playing at the soxx- 
ice line required that practicalh' all of the returns 




¥'^Y'\^'Vi^,OyuJL 




J Jc 




.—121 — 

should be volleyed or half-volleyed. But greatly to 
Mr. Sears' surprise, upou his first meeting with Dr. 
Dwight, he found that the Doctor had also conceived 
the same idea and adopted the same style of play. 
The two men then practiced the new game contin- 
ually, but their voire3-ing bore little resemblance to 
that of the present time, for it amounted to little 
more than tapping the balls back and forth. Nor 
would either of these gentlemen wish to be under- 
stood as claiming the honor of the invention of the 
volleying or net game, but it is worthy of note that 
this important element of play was not, like the rest 
of the game, an importation from England, but the 
product of the thought of two of our own players. 
It is an interesting fact, too, that while Englishmen 
had been familiar with the art of volleying for some 
time, this very year was the first in which W. Ren- 
shaw won the championship of England, and his 
victory was mainlj- secured by continuall}- running 
to the service line and swiftly vollejdng ever}- re- 
turn. 

That the adoption of the service line game b}- Mr. 
-Sears must have had a tremendous effect upon play 
in this country will be seen, when we come to con- 
sider the first championship tournament of the U. S. 
N. L. T. A., which was begun on the 31st day of 
August, 

1881. 

No better place than the Newport Casino could 
have been selected. The grounds were picturesque 
and the courts well kept. The accommodations for 
the players were good, and Newport being then, as 
now, a very fashionable resort, the most beautiful 



— 122 — 

women of the country graced the tournament with 
their presence. 

Both Singles and Doubles were pla^^ed, but as it 
was afterwards decided to sever the two events and 
play the Doubles at some place other than Newport, 
making practically a separate tournament of each, it 
is perhaps best to treat them as separate from the be- 
ginning, and confine the present chapter to a descrip- 
tion of the play in Singles. 

All of the then prominent players of the country 
were entered, with the exception of Dr. Dwiglit, 
whose ill health allowed him to compete only in the 
Doubles. Boston was represented b}'- Messrs. R. D. 
Sears, Shaw and Gray. Philadelphia provided the 
largest number of contestants, Messrs. Van Rensse- 
laer, Newbold, C. M. Clark, F. W. Taylor and 
others entering from that city, but the first named 
playing only in the Doubles. Messrs. Conover and 
Miller appeared for the State of New Jersey, Messrs. 
Nightingale and Smith came from Providence, and 
Mr. W. K. Glyn represented not only the Staten Is- 
land Club, but also the Knglish element. 

The tournament was undoubtedly one of the most 
interesting ever played in this country, but an in- 
stantaneous photograph of some of the scenes would 
appear strange and amusing to the players of the 
present day. The scoring was done by the present 
method, but all matches, until the final, were the 
best two out of three sets, with none deuce and van- 
tage. Mr. Sears and a few others used a service, 
which was a poor imitation of the present overhand 
method, but the remainder of the contestants never 
thought of attempting anything more than a plain 



123- 



(St 


3d 




3d 


4th 


Final 


Round. 


Round. 




Round. 


Round. 


Round. 


Seal's, 












6-0, 6-2. 


Sears, 


1 








Powell. 










Gainiuell, 


6-1, 6-2. 


f 


Sears, 






1-6, 6-3, 6-1. 


Anderson. 


J 








Newbold. 


1 






- Sears, 




Glyn, 


1 




6-3, 6-5. 




1-6, 6-1, 6-1. 


Glyn, 


'1 








Rives. 


6-5, 6-2. 


1 


Nightin- 


J 




Coiiover, 


r 


gale. 




6-1, 6-1. 


Y Conover. 


J 








Morse. 
RatUboue, 


1 






6-3, 6-0. 


Sears. 


6-5, 5-6, 6-5. 


> SUaw, 


1 








Saunders. 
Orav, 


[ 6-3, 6-5. 


1 
1- 

i 


Sliaw, 


1 




6-5, 6-3. 


> Rathbone, 


J 








Hines. 
Nig-litnisjale, 


1 




4-6, 6-3, 6-1. 


- Gray. . 




6-2, 6-0. 


y >rij>-1itiuj!;ale, 


■| 








Caldwell. 
Anderson, 


6-4, 6-3. 


1 
r 


Kessler. 






6-2, 6-0. 
Randolph. 


)- Barnes. 


) 




Champion, 
It. L>. Sears. 


Barnes, 

6-2, 1-6, 6-1. 


s- Oray, 


1 






6-0) 6-3, 6-2. 


Miller. 


1 








Cog'gswell, 


' 6-0, 6-0. 


r 


Glyn, 






6-4, 6-5. 


;- Cogg-swell. 


J 








Congdon. 
SiiiitU, 


J 




6-4, 4-6, 6-4. 


1- Glyn, 




by default. 


Kessler, 


1 








Eldridge. 
Kessler, 


[ 6-1, 6-2. 
s Smith. 




Gammell. 


-' 6-2, 6-2. 


- Glyn. 


6-1, 6-4. 


j 






Pruyn. 


\ 










Sliaw, 


\ Gaininell, 


/ 


(irai-. 


1 

j- Shaw. 




a bye. 


\' a bye. 


1' 


a bye. 





SCORE OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT OF 1881. 

NEWPORT, AUGUST 31ST. 
( T> R AW I N G BY OLD S Y S T B M . ) 



In this and the follo\ving scores the winner of each match is printed in 
heavy faced t^'pe. 



— 124 — 

underhand cut. The courts were in very good con- 
dition, but the Executive Committee apparently did 
not consider it objectionable to decide a match in 
Singles upon a court marked out fof Double play, 
as this was continually done. The contestants, with 
a single exception, played the base line game, and 
that exception was Mr. Sears, who continued his vol- 
leying tactics at the service line. The others were 
unfamiliar with this style of pla3% and each one, who 
was drawn against the Boston man, seemed impelled, 
as if by a magnet, to direct ever)^ return across the 
centre of the net, and straight into the hands of Mr. 
Sears, who calmly tapped first to one side of the 
court and then to the other, and thus won the first 
championship of the United States with scarcel}^ an 
effort. The racket used by Mr. Sears weighed six- 
teen ounces, and was much too heavy for ordinary 
play, but not for his purpose, which was merely to 
block or stop the ball. The harder his despairing 
adversaries drove the ball against the heavy racket, 
the harder it went back. lyobbing or tossing was 
then unknown, and he was therefore relieved from 
the greatest danger to which his st^-le of play could 
have been subjected. His closest match was with 
Mr. Nightingale, in the third round, while the final 
against Mr. Glyn was almost a walk over. And thus 
the medal, offered by the Association as an emblem 
of the Championship of the United States, for the 
year 1881, was won by Mr. R. D. Sears, of Boston, 
without losing a single set. 

But although Mr. Sears had worthily won the title, 
he was obliged, for the time being, to forego the 
honor of being considered the best player in the 







y 



— 1-27 — 

United States. Immediately after the decision of the 
championships, a new tournament in Singles was 
arranged, of which it was one of the conditions that 
the entr}^ list should be open to any player, whether 
a member of the National Association or not. The 
chief object of this competition was to bring together 
Mr. Sears and Mr. J. J. Cairnes, an Englishman, 
who was then at Newport, but who had been de- 
barred from competing in the National tournament. 
A handsome prize, known as the Ladies' Cup, was 
offered to the winner. There were many entries, 
more, in fact, than for the championship tournament, 
but the issue finall}^ narrowed down to Mr. Sears and 
Mr. Cairnes, just as had been desired. It will be 
remembered by those who were present that the at- 
mospheric conditions of the day, upon which these 
two players met to contest the final match, were so 
peculiar as to attract the general attention of scien- 
tific men. It was afterwards known throughout New 
England as the " Yellow Day. " Mr. Sears did not 
play in quite his usual form, but it is certain that he 
was then no match for the Englishman, who won in 
three straight sets, and thereby captured the Ladies' 
Cup. 

1882. 
The successful tournament of the previous j^ear 
had now increased the interest in Lawn Tennis to a 
wonderful degree, and the meeting held by the As- 
sociation in the spring of 1882 was an enthusiastic 
one. No changes in the rules were made, but Dr. 
Dwight was elected president in place of Mr. Oliver. 
The second championship tournament was begun at 
Newport on the 30th day of August, and the rapid 



128 



, ISt 


Round. V 


2d 

Round. 


3d 
Round. 


4th 
Round 


5th Final 
Round. R'd. 


TUorne, 


) SniitU, ) 


Conover ) 








6-4, 6-1. 


} 6-2, 6-2. '- 
) I.e Kov. ) 


2-6,6-0,6-2, - 








Newbold. 


Thorne. \ 


Sears, 






Katliboue 


1 Knf eland | 


J. s. -) 
Clark, 1 




1 Sears, 




6-0, 1-6,6-4. 


> by default, i 


6-1, 6-4. 


L 


C. 3r. ~ 




Paton. 


1 Van r 


6-3, 6-0. [ 






Clark, 




Cod man. 


) Rensselaer. J 
> Conovei', 1 

\ 6-2. 6 ^,. I 


Baillie. J 


Conover. 








6-3> 6-3. 


Powell, ) 




6-0, 6-4. 






Benson, 


6-0,6-1. - 






6-3, 6-2. 


■ Sears^ 


Powell, 


) Butler. ) 


Rathbone ) 


Kan- 






6-5,4-6,6-3. 


;- liaillie, 1 
\ 6-1,6-0. I 


Sears, 1 


kine, 


Ran- 






Woodman. 


6-1, 6-4. } 


6-4,5-6,7-5, 


kine. ^ 






J>wisht, 


i Metcalf. ) 


Glyn. ) 




Gray. 




6-1,6-0. 


> Sears, ) 
\ 6-4, 6-1. >- 


C. M. i 


Powell. 






Boardman, 


Clark. 1 








Nightin- 


"i Johnson. ^ 
1 Gray, ) 
( by default. ^ 


6-5.6-1. r 








gale, 


Codman. 1 


C. M. 1 


C. M. 




by default. 


Night- 1 


Clark, 


Clark, 




Draper. 


J Agassiz. \ 


mgale, | 


6-3,2-6,6-1. 


Champion. 


Rives, 


31aloolm-l 


6-4, 6-1. 1' 




1{. 1). Se^rs, 


6-1, 6-0, 


son, 1 


£;idridge. J 


Rives. 


with- 


6-1, 6-4, 6-0, 


Thomes. 


1-6,6-4, 6 3, f 


Rives, i 






Kankine, 


) Brooks. 1 


4-6,6-1,6-5, V 
Kneel and ) 




drawn. 




6-4, 3-6, 6-1. 


• iilyn, J 


Gray, " 






Miller. 


\ 6-2, 6-0. :- 


Ciray, ) 


6-4, 6-4. 






Allen, 


1 Hynes. ) 


6-1.6-1, y 


Dwight^ 




6-4, 5-6, 6-2. 


y J. S. Clark 


Smith. ) 


Nightin- 






Carryl. 


J 6-5,6-1. - 


Dwight, 1 


gale. J 




Sears, ) ^. ^^ 
a bye. )■ '''^'^- 




Post. \ 
C. 31. •] 
Clark. 1 


with- 1 
drawn, f 








Allen. 1 


Dwight, ; 


<iray, ) 






6-3. 6-1. i 


Ran- 1 










Bolt. J 


kine, i 


6-1, 6 0. 


a bye. j 






Elrtridge, | 


6-0, 6-0. |- 


\ 








bv default. J- 


Malcolm- 1 


J.S.Clai-kJ 








" Roby. ) 


son. J 









SCCRE OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT OF 1882, 

NEWPORT, AUGUST 30th. 



— liL9— 

growth of the game was shown b}' the forty entries 
in the Singles, against twent^'-five in the previous 
year. Among the new comers were Mr. J. S. Clark, 
then a student at Harvard, and Mr. K. Thorne, a 
Yale man. The former has since pla)'ed a conspic- 
uous part in I^awn Tennis histor^^, but Mr. Thorne 
made his first and only appearance in this tourna- 
ment, a fact much to be regretted, for, although a 
beginner, his volle3-ing was so scA^ere and so true 
that practice would have made him one of the fore- 
most plaj-ers of the country. 

All of the old players were again on hand, and this 
time Dr. Dwight had entered, but those who had 
looked forAvard with pleasure to a meeting between 
him and Mr. Sears were again disappointed, for after 
easily defeating J. S. Clark in the third round, the 
Doctor sprained an ankle, while playing his first set 
against Mr. C. M. Clark, and withdrew. Mr. Clark 
had a slight lead at the time and the issue of the 
match was decidedl}- doubtful. 

The general style of play was materially different 
from that of the year before. Every player serA-ed 
an overhand ser\'ice, and nearly every one of the 
fort}" entries, all of whom had played the base-line 
game in 1881, now became an imitator of Mr. Sears, 
and rushed to the net at every opportunity. But the 
champion had the advantage of a 3'ear's start at this 
game. His volleying no longer consisted of tapping 
or blocking the ball. It was now so accurate and 
severe, that he was easily superior to the others, and 
repeated his performance of the previous 3-ear, by 
winning the championship without losing a set. 
Surprise has often been expressed that Mr. Sears 



— l:]0 — 

was able to retain the championship for so long a^ 
period, as he afterwards did, and this tournament of 
1882 seems to provide a very fair explanation of his 
remarkable superiority- . Just as he was then a year 
ahead of his fellow players in the art of volleying, 
so did he always afterwards remain a 3'ear ahead of 
them in all the finer points of the game. If a new 
stroke was developed, such as the drop stroke, for in- 
stance, he was always the first to introduce it into 
this country-, but not until he himself had thoroughly 
practiced it and become almost perfect in its execu- 
tion. When, together with this fact, it is considered 
that he had a natural aptitude for athletic sports in 
general, it is not so difficult to understand and ac- 
count for his brilliant record. 

After Dr. Dwight withdrew from this tournament, 
it became a foregone conclusion that Mr. C. M. 
Clark would meet Mr. Sears in the finals. No one 
had been able to win more than five games in two 
sets against Mr. Sears, and Mr. Clark was able to 
secure onl}' the same number in the three .sets which 
composed the final match. Mr. Sears was therefore 
hailed as champion for a second time, and while a 
few still considered Dr. Dwight his equal, the great 
majority believed him to be clearly the best pla3'erin 
the United States at the end of the year 1882. 
18S3. 

There was no legislation of importance at the next 
meeting of the Association, and Dr. Dwight was re- 
elected president. The third championship tourna- 
ment was begun on the 21st of August. Manj^ of 
the oldest and most skillfiil pla3'ers were not entered. 
The Clark brothers were abroad, trying to capture 



■131- 



ISt 


2d 




3d 


4th 


Final 


Round. 


Round. 




Round. 


Round. 


Round. 


W. U. Dixon, 












4-6, 6-3, 6-1. 












Iv. Bonsai. 


l)\vit>i»t, 


1 








A. Nevvbold, 


fi-^ 6-n 


f 








by default. 
G. W. Beals. 


U-j, u-u. 

Paton. 


\ 


Uwiglit, 






H. ^V. H. Powell, 






6-2, 6-3. 






6-2, 6-0. 












— . Wharton. 


Sear.s, 


I 


Brinlej'. 


Sears, 




K. F. Coiiover, 


6-1, 6-4. 


l 








5-6, 6-1, 6-1. 
J. Tooker. 


Farnuni. 


i 




6-0, 6-0. 


Sears, 

- 


G. iU. Urlnlev, 












65, 6-1. 
H. Hooper. 


Siuitli, 


1 


Seai>, 


I Keene. 




M. Paton, 


6 5, 6-1. 


\ 




1 




6-5, 6-4- ^ 


" Eldridg-e. 


6-2, 6-0. 


r 




\V. F. Metcalfe. 












G. >1. Smith, ) 






Powell. 


1 




by default. 1 


Brinley, 


) 




Champion, 


— . WillianLS. ] 


6-4, 5-6, 6-3. 






R. 


D. Sears. 


■\V. H.Uackiiall, 


i. 




6- 


2, 6-0, 9-7. 


6-5, 6-5, 


- Newbold. 


1 








W. Ganimell, Jr. 












M. Pest, 






Keeiie, 


' 




6-4, 6-4. 


- C'oiiover, 


-) 








J. H. Powell. 


6-2, 6-2. 


I 


6-3, 6-4. 


Dwiglit, " 




J. D\vi!>lit, 1 




f 






6-0, 6-2. ] 


Dixon. 


J 


Smith. 






M. Thomes. 












P. Keeiif, J 








6-4, 6-3. 


■ 


6-4, 6-1. 


Keeiie, 


\ 






Dwight. 


— . Johnson. \ 


6-2, 6-4. 








r. Kid ridge, 


Post. 


) 




Conover. 




6-5, 3-6, 6-4. 






C'oiiover, 


) 




F. J. Hynes. 








V 




0. l<"ariiiiiii, 


Powell, 


\ 


a bj-e. 


\ 




6-2, 4-6, 6-4. 


6-1, 6-5. 








H. A. Taylor. 








K. X). Seal's, 


Buck nail. 


') 








a bye. 













SCORE OFTHECHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT OF 1883, 

NEWPORT, AUGUST 21st to 24th. 



— 1J2 — 

Bnglish laurels, and Mr. Glyn and Mr. Nightingale 
were unable to play. New life was infused into the 
game, however, by the entries of several of the 
younger generation of players, and notable among 
these were G. M. Brinley, Foxhall Keene, Charles 
Farnum and H. A. Taylor, the last named being the 
same plaj^er whose record has since been so brilliant. 
But no one was considered to have any real chance 
for the championship except Mr. Conover, Dr. 
Dwight and Mr. Sears. The two ancient rivals from 
Boston met in the final round, as expected, and a 
deuce and vantage set was then pla5"ed for the first 
time at Newport. Mr. Sears really won an easy 
victory, but the third and final set was extremely 
close, the score being 9-7. By finally winning this 
set and match, the popular champion completed a 
most wonderful record, having played through three 
championship tournaments without losing a single 
set. 

The methods of play shown in this tournament 
differed but little from those of the 3'ear previous, al- 
though a general improvement was noticed. Shortly 
afterwards, Messrs. Dwight and Sears went abroad 
to enjoy the winter Tennis in the south of France, 
and neither of these gentlemen w^as present at the 
next convention of the Association, held in New 
York during the earl}^ months of 
1884. 

One very important step was now taken. It was 
resolved that the champion should be debarred from 
competing in the All-Comers tournament, and re- 
quired to defend his title against the winner, who 
should challenge him immediately upon the termi- 
nation of the contest. The interest in the next tour- 



— 133 — 



Preliminary 
Round. 



R.L.Beeck- ] 
man, 

6-3, 6-2. 

M. Post. 

AV. V. S. 

Thome, 

6-0, 6-1. 

F. Warren. 

G. M. Bi-in- 

ley. 

6-5, 6-1. 

W. Merriman 



ist 
Round. 

R. t. Beeck- 
inaii, 

6-5, 6-1. 

S. H. Hooper. 

P. Willis, 

6-3, 6-3. 

A. I, Rives. 

W. P. Knai>i>, 

6-4, 6-2. 

F. H. Gillette. 
AV. K. Eaton, 

by default, 

J. Dwight. 

H. A. Taylor, 

6-1,6-1. 

Brinley. 

J. S. Clark. 

6-2, 6-0. 

W. F. Metcalfe. 

A. Van 
Kensselaev, 

6-5, 6-1. 
"W. H. Barnes. 
K.F.Conover 

6-2, 6-2. 

F. Keene. 

— . Thorne, 

0-6, 6-5, 6-4. 

M. Paton. 

H. W. 

Slociini, Jr. 

4-5, 6-2, 6-3. 

F, J. Hynes. 

G. Richards, 
by default. 
— . Wood. 

K. Butler, 

6-2, 6-1. 

W. V. R. Berry. 

C. M. Clark, 

6-3, 6-4. 

— . Curtis. 

P. Lyinan, 

6-3) 6-3. 

— . Halliwell. 

— Gait, 

6-5, 6-t. 

E. Deiiniston. 

M. Fielding:, 

6-1, 6-4. 
W. Gam- 

mell, Jr. 



2d 
Round. 



1- Beeckinan, 
J 1-6, 6-5, 6-2. 
Willi.s. 

y Knai>p, 

6-1, 6-r. 
Eaton. 

Taylor, 

3-6, 6-2, 7-5. 
J. S. Clark. 

A'an Rens- 
selaer, 

6-4, 2-6, 6-3. 

Conover. 

Thorne, 

by default, 
Slocum. 

Richards, 

4-6, 6-5, 6-4. 
Butler. 

C.M.Clark, 

6-4, 6-1. 
layman. 

Gait, 

6-4, 6-1. 
Fielding. 



3d 4th Final 

Round. Round. Round* 



r Beeck- ] 
I man, 



y Knapp. J 

I 

j Taylor, 

6-4, 6-1. 

.!- 

Van 
Rensse- | 
laer. J 



Thorne, 1 

by I 

default, f 

Richards. J 



Knapp, l 



6-2,2-6,6-1. r Taylor. 



Taylor. 



Winner, 
H. A. Taylor, 

6-4, 4-6, 6-1, 6-4. 



Thome, 



2-6,6-2-6-3. !. Thorne. 



C, 31. 
Clark, 



6-2, 6-2. 



I 
Gait. J 



C. M. 
Clark. J 

Championship, 
R. B. Sears, 

6-0, 1-6, 6-0, 6-2. 
H. A. Taylor. 



SCORE OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT OF 1884, 

NEWPORT, AUGUST 26th to 30th. 
(drawing by bagnall-wild system.) 



— 134 — 

nament, which was played during the last week of 
August, was much enhanced b}^ the adoption of this 
rule. With Mr. Sears entered, the result would have 
been a foregone conclusion. With him out, it was 
an open question. Dwight and Sears returned from 
abroad just before the tournament, and the former 
entered, but did not play in the Singles, although 
his game had been vastl}^ improved by practice with 
Bnglish experts. The Clark brothers reappeared, 
however, and now, for the first time, more or less 
college feeling crept into the competition, for W. P. 
Knapp and W. V. S. Thorne, under-graduates of 
Yale, were pitted against H. A. Ta3-lor and J. S. 
Clark, of Harvard. R. ly. Beeckmau and H. W. 
Slocum, Jr., a Yale gradiiate, also made their first 
appearances, the former being then a most promis- 
ing and the latter a very inferior player. 

This tournament of 1884 was chiefly remarkable 
for the brilliant performance of H. A. Taylor, then 
only 17, or at the most 18 years of age. Veterans 
and new comers alike went down before him. He 
defeated Brinley, J. S. Clark, Van Rensselaer, and 
finally the two Yale men, Knapp and Thorne, in 
rapid succession. He was the smallest in stature of 
all the players, and no one who witnessed it will for- 
get his plucky fight against the veteran giant. Van 
Rensselaer. But while giving full credit to Mr. 
Taylor, it is onlj- just to add that one, whom he de- 
feated early in the tournament, was probably his 
equal in skill. Mr. J. S. Clark was at this time in 
his best form. He was drawn against Mr. Taylor in 
the second round, won the first set, lost the second 
and was within one point of winning the third and 
the match. If he had succeeded in scoring that one 




r 



R.^^:^ 



^- 



Cb^ 



oX^ 



y^ 



iTv* 



— 137 — 

last point, it is almost certain that J. S. Clark would 
have been recorded as the winner of the All-Comers 
Tournament of 1884 instead of H. A. Taylor. 

Immediatel}' after winning, Mr. Taylor of course 
challenged Mr. Sears for the championship. This 
match calls for little comment, inasmuch as the 
champion, fresh from practice with the best plaj-ers 
of England, had no difficulty in retaining his title. 
IVlr. Tajdor deserves credit, however, for capturing 
one set, a feat which no one up to this time had been 
able to accomplish. 

1885. 

This year was marked b^- a large amount of Lawn 
Tennis legislation. In the first place, the playing 
rules were amended to conform as far as possible to 
those used in England. A contrary move was made, 
however, in respect to the ball. Up to this time, 
the English ball, manufactured by Ayres, had been 
universalh' used, but now certain members of the 
Association, moved by patriotism and sundry other 
causes, made a successful effort to secure the adoption 
of a ball manufactured by a New York firm. This 
ball afterwards turned out to be an utter failure. 

This was the year, also, in which a new challenge 
cup was offered by the Association. The cup was 
emblematic of the championship, and it was neces- 
sary to win it in three not necessarily consecutive 
3^ears, before it became the property of the holder. 
Another step in the right direction was taken, by re- 
solving that all sets in the All-Comers Tournament 
should be deuce and vantage. 

The annual tournament was played at Newport in 
the month of August, as usual, and for the first time, 
no one of those veteran players, who had supported 



— 13S 



Preliminary 


rst 


2d 


3d 


Final 


Round. 




Round. 


Round. 


Round. 


Round. 


R. r. 


1 


J. S. Clark. 








lieeckiiiaii, 


6-2, 1-6,8-6. 


- Clark, 






6-1,6-2. 


j" 


Beeck:nan. 








G. A. Smith. 
H. Lilien- 


J 

1 




7-5,1-6,6-3. 


- Clark, - 




thal, 


1 


A. 3ro«at, 








bv default. 


j' 


6-0, 9-11 , 6-3. 


- Moffat. 






C.'M. Clark. 


J 


:Mansfield. 








i\ S. Man.s- 


1 






6-4, 6-3. 




fielfl, 








- Knapp, 


6-3. 6-3, 


i 


Kiiapi), 








C. E. Garrett. 




6-0, 6-2. 


V Kiiapi), -, 






W. P. 


i 


Hooper. 








Kjiapp, 

6-1.7-5, 


! 

f 




4-6. lo-S, 
. 6-2. 


- Knapi). , 




AV. Shippen. 


J 


H. A. Tay- 






— Xishtiii- 


j 


lor, 

6-4, 6-2. 


1 

; Taylor. 






.!;ale. 










6-3, 4-6, 7-5, 


1 


Nightingale. 








H.S.Morgan, 








Winner, 


C. K. DavLs, 


1 








(i. M. Brinley 


6-3, 7-5- 


1 


G. M. Brin- 






6-3, 6-3, 3-6, 6-4. 


P. E. Pres- 


J 


ley. 








brey. 


6-1. 4-6, 6-2. 


- Brinley, 






S. H. Hoop- 


1 


H. W. Slo- 






er. 

9-7, 6-2. 


1 

r 


cum, Jr. 


6-2, 6-1. 


Brinley, -, 




F. J. Hii:es. 
F. Keeue, 

9-7, 6-2, 
F. H. Gillett. 


J 


Davis, 

6-1, 6-0. 


,- Davis. 






\ 


Lillienthal. 






Brinley. 


AV. V. K. 

lierrv, 

6-3, 6-1. 

M. A. DeW. 

Howe. 


1 


TJerry, 




5-6,9-7,6-1. 






6-3, 2-6, 6-3. 
Warren. 


- Berry. 






F. AVarren, 


( 




6-2, 6-1. ] 


Berry. 


Championship, 


3-6,6-3, 7-5.- 




Keene, 


) 




K. U. Sears, 


W. Lewis. 


i' 


bv default. 


V Keene. J 




6-3, 4-6, 6-0, 6-3, 






M. Pa ton. *, 




G. M. Brinley. 



SCORE OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT OF 1885. 

NEWPORT, AUGUST 18th to 21st. 



— 189 — 

the game in its earlier days, was present. The 
familiar names of Dwight, C. M. Clark, Conover and 
Van Rensselaer did not appear in the entry list of 
the tournament. All these had dropped out one by 
one, leaving the field to the j-ounger generation of 
players, such as J. S. Clark, Beeckman, H. A. Ta}-- 
lor, Brinley, Knapp, Thorne and Slocum. Much to 
the surprise of a great many, the All-Comers was 
v/on by G. M. Brinley, of Trinity College, a left- 
handed player of remarkable dash, grace and bril- 
liancy. His narrow escape from defeat in the third 
round, at the hands of Mr. W. V. R. Berr}-, is worthy 
of note. Mr. Berry had won the most important tour- 
naments of the summer, and the judgment of those 
who thought that he could easily defeat Mr. Brin- 
ley, was apparentl}- confirmed when he won the first 
set and rolled up a score of five games to one in the 
second. Mr. Brinley 's chance of winning the All- 
Comers here hung by a slender thread, but a suc- 
cession of brilliant pla3^s suddenly turned the scale in 
his favor and finall)^ enabled him to win the match. 

This tournament was indeed a succession of sur- 
prises. Two of these were furnished by Knapp, the 
Yale champion, who defeated both of his Harvard 
rivals, H. A. Taylor and J. S. Clark. Knapp thus 
earned the right to plaj' against Brinley in the final 
round, but was rather easily defeated. 

The championship match was the old story over 
again. Since the meeting of 1884, Mr. Sears had 
made another trip to England and returned to this 
country with, an entirely new stroke. It was the 
famous drop stroke, which by some chance was mis- 
named in the United States, and became generally 
known as the ' ' L,awford. ' ' Sears used it with tell- 



— 140 — 

ing effect in his match with Brinley, and easily won 
the championship of the United States for the fifth 
consecntive time. 

1886. 

The American ball had proved so unsatisfactory, 
that it was now thrown out and the Ayres ball re- 
adopted. It was thought that a match of two out of 
three sets afforded an unsatisfactory test of the rela- 
tive merits of two pla3'ers, and it was therefore de- 
termined that three out of five sets should constitute 
a match in all future championship tournaments. 
Only the odd or deciding set should be deuce and 
vantage, except in the final round. The adoption of 
this rule naturall}' made endurance an element of 
much more importance than before. 

Dr. Dwight had again been abroad, but returned 
during the summer and determined to try for the 
championship once more. He therefore entered the 
All-Comers, which was begun at Newport, as usual, 
on the 23d day of August. The luck of the drawing 
brought together Dr. Dwight and H. A. Taylor in 
the preliminary round, and their meeting produced 
one of the hardest contests ever fought at Newport. 
Dwight' s chief trouble was his lack of endurance, 
and after easily winning the first two sets, he was 
obliged to succumb to his plucky adversar}^ in each 
of the next three, the fifth and deciding set being 
won by the remarkable score of 13-1 1, and that, too, 
after the Doctor had been several times within one 
point of winning it. 

A number of ver}- 3'oung players appeared at New- 
port for the first time in this tournament. Among 
these were Mr. O. S. Campbell, who made a good 
fight against Mr. Slocuni in the first round ; the 



Ml 



Preliminary 
Round. 



P. E. 

Pres- 
brey, 

6-3,6-1,6-5. 

Gamble. 

W. H. 

Barnes. 

6-4,2-6,6-3, 

4-6,6-4. 

G. A. 

Smith. 



I St 

Round. 

Presbrey, 

6-2, 3-6, 6-2, 6-4. 

G. M. Bi-inley. 

J. S. Clark, 

6-0, 6-1,6-1. 

Edgar. 

H. W. Slocum, 

Jr. 

4-6, 6-1, 6-3, 6-0, 

O. S. Campbell. 

P. S. Sears, 

5-6,4-6,6-1,6-0,6--?. 

W. R. Weeden. 

H. A. Taylor, 

0-6,3-6,6-1,6-2, 

13-11. 

J. Dwight. 

W. V. K. Berry, 

6-4,5-6,4-6,6-4,6-1. 

G. McKenzie. 
Q. A. Shaw, Jr. 

6-4, 6-4, 6-0. 

W. Gam mail, Jr. 

Smith, 

6-1, 6-1, 6-0. 

Man ice. 

R. L. Beeck- 

man, 

6-0, 6-0, 6-1. 

Miller. 

H. M. Sears, 

2-6,6-3,6-3,5-6,7-5. 

Nightingale. 

r.S.Mansfieia, 

6-1, 6-0, 6-0. 

W. Lewis. 

M. Fielding-, 

6-2, 6-2, 6-3. 

S. H. Hooper. 

C A. Chase, 

6-0, 6-3, 6-0. 

A. L. Rives. 

Kobbins, 

by default, 

d'Invilliers. 

M. Post, 

by default. 

M. Paton. 

P. Warren, 

7-9,2-6,6-3.6-0,6-4. 

F. W. Taylor. 



2d 
Round. 

1 

]- Brinlej-. 

=1 6-0,6-4,6-3. 

'r Clark. 
J 
1 

|- Sloeiim, 

] 6-2,4-6.6-2, 

{ 4-6,6-3. 

!. p. s. 
J 



3d 
Round. 



1 

' Clark, "1 



1-6,6-5 6-5, 
6-2. 



Slocum. J 



Seats. J 



Taylor, 

6-0,6-0,6-1. 
Berrj'. 



|- Shaw, 

J 6-0,6-1,4-6, 
] 6-1. 

- Smith. 



I Beeck- 
I man, 

I 6-2,6-0,6 o. 
1 H. M. 
i- Sears. 

I 

I 

1 Mans- 
I field, 
1 6-4,6-1,6-3, 
i- Fielding. 



6-4,^-6,6-0, 
6-;. 



Chase, 

6-5,6-3,6-2. 
Rob bins. 



I Post, 

J 6-2,6-4,3-6, 
I 2-6,6-2. 
j- Warren. 
J 



Mans- 
field. 



]- Chase, 

6-0,6-2,6-4. 
"1 
i- Post. 



4th 
Round. 



Clark, 1 



Final 
Round. 



6-5,6-2,6-3. y Taylor. 



; Tavlor, , 

J ■ I 

6-3,6-5,6-5. [_ 

] I 

j. Shaw. J 

J 



Beeck- 
man. 



Taylor. J 



Winner. 
K.l..Beeckman. 

2-6,6-3,6-4,6-2. 



)■ Beeck- 
' man, 



6-4,6-0,6-5, 



Beeck- 
man. 



Championship, 
R. D. Sears. 

4-6, 6-1, 6-3, 6-4. 
R. L. Beeckman. 



SCORE OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT OF 1886, 

NEWPORT, AUGUST 23d to 28Tn. 



— 142 — 

Sears tv.'ins, brothers of the champion, and Mr. Q. 
A. Shaw, Jr., also from Boston. Mr. C. A: Chase, the 
champion of the West, also made his first attempt to 
win championship honors in the East. 

Brinley, the All-Comers winner of the previous 
3-ear, was badly beaten by J. S. Clark, who also dis- 
posed of Slocum's chances in a close contest. Tay- 
lor, in the meantime, had continued to pla}- in the 
same brilliant form which he had shown against 
Dwight, and after defeating Clark, it seemed almost 
certain that the honor of meeting the champion 
should once more fall to him. A serious obstacle 
arose, however, in the person of Mr. R. L,. Beeckman, 
of New York. This plaj^er had been continually 
improving in skill and was exactly ' ' on edge ' ' when 
he met Taylor in the final round. The contest was 
close and a pretty one, but the swift and effective 
drop stroke of Beeckman won the da3\ 

The championship match which followed was most 
exciting, for Mr. Sears suffered a much nearer ap- 
proach to defeat than ever before. When Beeckman 
won the first set, it was quite generally believed that 
the champion's unbroken series of victories had come 
to an end. He pulled himself together, however, 
and by a violent effort won the next three sets. It 
is said that Dr. Sears was not in the best of form at 
the time of this match, but it is only just to concede 
to Mr. Beeckman the honor of being the first player 
of this countr}^ who was able to force the unconquer- 
able Sears to exert himself to the utmost in a cham- 
pionship match. 

It may be interesting to note the relative positions 
of the experts at the end of the year 1886. A player, 
who was familiar with the abilities of each, ranked 





OU^A^Qy u-^^ " Jni 



CL^jlJ 



— 145 — 

thera as follows : i, Sears; 2, Dwight ; 3, Beeck- 
man ; 4, Taylor; 5, Clark ; 6, Slocum ; 7, Brinley ; 
8, Mansfield ; 9, MofFatt ; 10, Conover. 
1887. 

At the next meeting of the Association, held in 
March, it was determined to make still another 
change in the ball. The ball manufactured by 
Wright & Ditson, of Boston, was adopted as Regu- 
lation, and gave almost universal satisfaction. Mr. 
R. D. Sears was elected president of the Association, 
the membership of which had been more than 
doubled since the organization in 1881. About sev- 
ent)^ clubs now sent delegates to the annual con- 
vention. 

As the time for the All- Comers again drew near, 
there was considerable speculation as to the resiilt of 
the championship, for it seemed to be generally be- 
lieved that a few of the first-class players were ap- 
proaching nearer than ever before to the standard 
of excellence set up by Mr. Sears. Mr. Beeckman 
and Mr. Slocum were looked upon as the most likely 
winners of the tournament, and the fortunes of war 
brought them together in the first round. Mr. 
Slocum won after four hard fought sets. No new 
player showed skill sufficient to attract much atten- 
tion, but there was some interest in the debut of 
young Mr. Fearing, of Newport, and Mr. W. ly. 
Thacher, a new Yale champion, won a place in the 
third round by defeating Brinley. Slocum won from 
Clark in the third round, and thus earned the right 
to play H. A. Taylor in the final. This match was 
a desperate one, Slocum winning in three remark- 
ably close sets. 

The idea that the other pla3'ers were gaining on 



— 141! 



Preliminary 
Round. 

O. A. Sha^v, 
Jr. 

by default, 
A. E. Wright. 
W. Cushman. 
I2-IO, 5-7, 6-1, 

6-3. 
\V. K. 

Tliaclier, 
H.C Bovvers, 

by default, 

W. R. Weeden. 

M. Fielding. 

6-4, 6-4, 6-0. 

11. li. Beeck- 

inaii, 
O. S. Campbell. 

6-3, 6-2, 7-5. 
H. A. Taylor, 
H. Gniiiioiis, 

6-1, 6-4, 6-1. 
W. H. Barnes. 
O.R. Fearing', 
Jr. 
6-4, 6-4, 6-0. 
W. Lewis. 
P. Manches- 
ter. 
6-0, 6-2, 6-0. 
C. E. Oari-ett. 



ist 
Round. 

r. 3Ian.sfield, 

6-2, 8-6, 6-1. 
H. C. Bowers. 
J. S. Clark, 
8-6, 6-3, 8-6. 
Q. A. Shaw, Jr. 
G. R. Fear- 
ing, Jr. 
8-6,3-6,6-4,6-1. 
C. E. Garrett. 
H. W. Slo- 
cuni, Jr. 
6-2, 4-6, 9-7, 6 3. 
R. L. Beeck- 
man. 
Ganson Depew 

6-1, 6-4, 6-3. 
H. A. Taylor, 
F. Warren. 
6-3, 6-2, 6-0. 
P. S. Hears, 
G. M. Brin- 

ley, 

6-4, 6-1, 6-2. 

H. Emmons. 

F. W. Taylor. 

6-3, 9-7, 6-3. 

\V. K. 
Tliaclier. 



2d 
Round. 

; Mansfield, 

J 3-6, 6-2, 6-S, 
1 6-1, 6-4. 
'r Clark. 



Fearing, 

6-1, 7-5, 6-2. 
Slociini. 



; Taylor, 

J 6-1, 1-6, 6-3, 

I 6-1. 

]■ Sears. 

J 

1 

[ Brinley, 

J 6-4,8-6,3-6, 

1 6-4. 

1- Tliaclier. 



3d 
Round. 



Clark, 1 



Final 
Round. 



I 

1 

6-8, 6-4, 6-3, 1. siooum. 



Slocnin. i 



Winner, 
H. yw Slocuin, Jr. 

12-10, 7-5, 6-4. 



Taylor, 1 

i 

6-3, 6-1, 6-1. |- Taylor. 

I 
Thacher. J 

Championship, 
R. U. Sears, 

6-1, 6-3, 6-2. 
H. W. Slocum,Jr. 



SCORE QF THE CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT OF 1887. 

NEWPORT, AUGUST 22d to 30th. 



— 147 — 

the champion was apparently exploded, when Mr. 
Sears defeated Mr. Slocuni for the championship with 
seeming ease. This victor}^ was an important one 
for man}' reasons. Mr. Sears had now won the chal- 
lenge cup for the third time, and it therefore became 
his personal property. It will be remembered, too, 
that Mr. Renshaw had first captured the champion- 
ship of England in 1881, the same year in which Mr. 
Sears had first won the honor in this country. Both 
men had succeeded in retaining their titles until this 
year, when a physical injury had compelled Mr. Ren- 
shaw to lose by default. This victory of 1887 there- 
fore gave Mr. Sears a lead of one year over Mr. Ren- 
shaw. 

It is a singular coincidence that our champion was 
afterwards compelled, like Mr. Renshaw, to with- 
draw from the competition on account of an injury. 
All interested in the game sincerel}^ hope that the 
withdrawal is onl}' temporar}^ and that the victories 
of the future will be even more numerous than those 
of the past, but it is quite possible that the champion- 
ship match of 1 887 brought the I^awn Tennis career 
of this wonderful player to a fitting end. It completed 
a record of victories, not marred by a single defeat. 

A study of the Newport matches played by Mr. 
Sears discloses some interesting facts. During the 
seven 3^ears in which he held the championship, 
or from 1881 to 1887, inclusive, he played eighteen 
matches in Singles and won them all. Those eighteen 
matches were composed altogether of fortj'-six sets, 
of which Mr. Sears won fortj'-three. Of those forty- 
three, twelve were love sets, and in eight others the 
score was 6-1. Mr. Sears won in all 270 games, 
against loi won bv his adversaries. 



— 148 — 

1 888. 

When it became certain, during the early part of 
this 3^ear, that Mr. Sears' injun,' would necessitate 
his retirement, each of the expert players practiced 
with renewed zeal, in the hope that the mantle of the 
champion would fall upon his shoulders. Even the 
veteran Dwight determined to try once more, and 
therefore sent in his entry for the All- Comers tour- 
nament in August. C. A. Chase, J. A. Ryerson, 
Emerson Tuttle and B. B. I,amb were welcomed as 
representatives of the Western players, while the 
East furnished its usual quota. 

Chase and Slocuni were drawn together in the pre- 
liminary round, and although the latter won, he 
played in such miserable form that there was appar- 
ently no chance of his v/inning the tournament. 
Mr; P. S. Sears, brother of the champion, made a 
strong fight to retain the championship honors in his 
family, but was compelled to succumb to H. A. Tay- 
lor, who was playing his usual admirable game. 
His victory over Mr. P. S. Sears carried Mr. Taylor 
into the final round in compan}^ with Mr. Slocum, 
who had taken a decided brace and defeated Clark, 
Dwight and Campbell in rapid succession. The final 
match between Taylor and Slocuni was decidedly 
uninteresting, the former going to pieces and al- 
lowing his rival to win easih'. Mr. R. D. Sears 
then made his default in the championship match, 
and H. W. Slocum, Jr. became champion for the 
year 1888, as well as the first holder of the new chal- 
lenge cup which had been offered by the Asso- 
ciation. 

There was considerable diversity- of opinion as to 
the relative merits of the various players who ap- 



149 



Preliminary 

Round. 

H. AV. Slo- 

fum, Jr. 

5-7, 5-2, 1-6, 

6-2. 6--^ 

C. A. Chase. 



ist 

Round. 

Slofuiii, 

6-2, 60, 6-0. 
W.H.Barnes. 
J. S. Clark. 

6-3-3-6.6-i,6-2. 
F. I.. V. Hop- 
pin. 

6-3. 6-r, 6 2. 

F. W. Taylor. 

C. E. Stick- 

nej', 
by default. 
K. Tattle. 
C. Beatty, 
6-3. 6-3,9-7. 
C. P. Wilbur 
W. Waller, 
7-.S, 6-3. 6-2. 
O. .s. t'aiup- 

bell. 
F. Warren, 
6-1, 6-2, 6-3. 
M. Fielding: 
A. E. 
AVright, 
6-2,6-3, 6-3. 
J.F.I?rown,Jr. 
W. R.Weedeii 
6-4, 7-5, 6-2. 
ii. \V. Lee. 
W. L. Jen- 
nings, 
6-2, 6-3, 6-2. 
P. S. Sears, 

A. Hubbard, 
8-6,6-3,3-6,6-0. 
J. A^ liyer- 

SOll, 

A. Iv Rives, 
6-1, 62 6-1. 

B. 1:. Lamb 
H. A. Tay- 
lor, 

bv default. 
F.A. Kellogg. 
G,M. Brinley, 
bv default. 
K.'lJ. Hale, 
P. K. Pres- 

brey, 
19-21, S-6, 6-1, 

3 6,6-4, 
T. S. Tailer. 
A. L. Wil- 

liston, 
6-4, 6-S. 7-^, 

v6, 5-2. 
V. G. Hall. 



2d 
Round. 


3d 
Round. 


4th 
Round. 


Final 
Round 


1 

r Slocum, 








I 6-2,6-3.6-2 


Sloeuiu, 






:- Clark. 

J 


4-6,5-3,6-0, 

6-i. 


- Slocum, -. 




y DwigUt, 








[ 6-1,6-0,6-1 


- Dwight. 






j, Tuttle. 








!- Wilbur, 1 
J 6-2,6-1,6-3. 
Canip- 
1- bell, 

J 

[ Fielding, 




6-2,6-3,6-4. 


- iSlocnm 


y Camp- 
bell, 

4-6,6-3.1-6, 
S-6,6-2. 


Campbell 




J 2-6,5-2,6-1, 

6-1. 
y Wrisht. 

1 

r Lee, 


Wright. - 


Winner, 
H. AV. Sloenm, Jr 

6-4, 6-1, 6-0. 


'j 6-2,6-0,6-1. 


' Sear.s, 






j- iSears. 








) 


S 5,5-0,6-4. 


Sears, 




i 

y Ryer.soii 
6-2,6-0,3-6, 

1. I^amb. 


. Ryerson. 






1 




5-7, 6-4. 
6-2, 6-2. 


Taylor. 


j- Taylor, 








i <: ^ ^ 

1 6-1,5-1,6-1. 


- Taylor, 






j- Hale. , 








1 


6-2,6-3,7-5- 


Taylor. 




1' Presbrey, 








1 2-6,6-4,5-4, 

! 6-4. 

. Willi^s- 
! ton. 


- Williston - 


Championship, 
H. W\ SUuum, Jr 

by default. 
R. D. Sears. 



SCORE OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT OF 1888, 

NEWPORT, AUGU3T 20th to 25th. 



— 150 — 

peared during this j^ear. The following ranking 
was published over the signature of H. A. Ta^'lor : 
I, Slocum ; 2, Taylor; 3 Dwight ; 4, Clark; 5, 
Chase ; 6, P. S. Sears ; 7, McMullen ; 8, Campbell ; 
9, Beeckman ; 10, Mansfield ; 11, Shaw ; 12, Hall; 
13, Wright; 14, Williston ; 15, Hobart. 

1889. 

The next convention of the Association elected 
J. S. Clark to the presidency. There was no other 
legislation of importance, but the 3'ear 1889 w^ill al- 
ways be remembered by L,awn Tennis players with 
much interest. For the first time an international 
flavor was given to the competition at Newport by 
the appearance, as a contestant, of Mr. E. G. Meers, 
an Englishman who had ranked among the first ten 
men of his own country during the previous year. 
Foreign competitors we had had before, to be sure, 
but this was the first time that one had come with 
the avowed purpose of capturing our championship. 

The All-Comers was begun on Wednesday, the 
2ist of August. Mr. Meers was successful until the 
fourth round, when, strange to sa)^, it fell to the lot 
of one of our youngest players to dispose of his 
chances. Mr. O. S. Campbell had been gradually 
improving until he had earned a place among the 
foremost players, but in this particular tournament 
he surpassed himself, for he had already excited 
surprise by defeating the two veterans, J. S. Clark 
and H. A. Taylor, before meeting Mr. Meers in the 
fourth round. By far the best feature of Campbell's 
play was his volleying, and he now used it against 
the base line game of the Englishman with such ex- 
cellent judgment and skill, that the latter was com- 



151 



ist 
Round. 

C. A. Chase, 

6-0, 6-3, 6-1. 

F. O. Reade. 
A. L. Rives, 
6-2, 6-2, 6-t. 

11. B. Hale, 
F. W. Taylor, 

6-2, 6-2, 8-6. 
B. V. Beach. 
O. A. SliaAv, 
7-% 7-5. 6-3, 6-4. 
A. E. Wright. 
J. A. llyersoii, 
6-0, 5-7," 6-0, 7-5- 
A. I^. Williston. 
AV. P. Kiiapp, 
6-2, 8-6, 4-6, 6-2. 

M. Fielding. 

Deane Miller, 

6-4, 8-6, 6-1. 

R. C. Sands. 

G. K. Fearing, 

Jr. 

6-3, 6-2, 6-4. 

W. W. Reese. 

K.L.V. Hojjpin, 

6-3, 6-0, 6-1. 

S. C. Fo.\-. 

T. S. Tailer, 

9-7, 6-0, 6-1. 

r.S. Mansfield. 

E. W. Gould, Jr. 

6-3, 6-0, 6-2. 

M. K. Wright. 

K. O. Meers, 

6-4. 6-3, 6-3. 

C. E. Sands. 

G. A. Hurd, 
8-6, 6-4, 2-6, 6-4. 

S. T. Chase. 

J. S. Clark, 

6-3, 7-5, 6-4. 

W. R. Weeden. 

H. A. Taylor, 

6 3, 6--„ 6-0. 
R. P. Hunting- 
ton, Jr. 
O.S. Campbell, 

6-4, 6 I, 6-2. 
E. A. Thom.son. 



2d 
Round. 




3d 
Round. 


4th 
Round. 


Final 
Round. 


Chase, 


1 






6-4, 6-0, 6-3. 


1 
r 


Chase, 




Hale. 


J 






Beach, 

7-9, 6-2, 6-0, 

6-2. 


1 


6-4,6-4,4-6,6-3. 
Shaw. J 


Shaw, "1 


ShaAv. 

Ryerson, 

7-5, 8-6, 6-2. 

Kiiapx). 


J 

1 
I 


Knai>p, 


4-6,6-1,6-4, 
6-4. 


Q.A. 

Shaw, 

Jro 


Miller, 


1 


6-4, 6-3, 6-2. 


Knapp. ^ 




6-2, 6-2, 6-3. 


1 

1 


Miller. 




Fearing. 

Hoppin, 
7-5, 6-0, 6-1. 


Mansfield, ' 


Winner, 
Q. A. Shaw. Jr. 

1-6,6-4,6-3,6-4. 


Mansfield. 


J 










6-1, 6-2, 6-2. 


Meers, -, 


Wright, 


1 








7-5, 6-3, 6-4. 




Meers. 






Meers. 


J 








Chase, 

2-6, 6-1, 0-6, 

6-4 ,7-5- 
Clark. 


1 
1 


Clark, 

10-12, 7-5, 6-3, 
6-3. 


5-7,6-1,5-7, 
6-4, 6-2. 

Cami>- 
bell. J 


0. S. 
Campbell 


Taylor, 
6-4,6-4,5-7,6-2 
Caniphell. 


\ 


Campbell. 


Champ 
H. AV. Sl< 

6 3,6-1, 
Q.A. S 


onship, 
)ciim, Jr. 

4-6, 6 2. 
lavv, Jr. 



SCORE OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT OF 1889. 

NEWPORT, AUGUST 21st To 28th. 



— 152 — 

pelled to lower his colors and resign all claim to 
the championship of the United States. 

But Mr. Campbell was not the only young pla5^er 
to win honors in 1889. Mr. Q. A. Shaw, Jr., of 
Boston, had likewise taken a mighty stride forward. 
Mr. P, S. Sears being abroad, the hopes of the Bos- 
tonians were centered upon Mr. Shaw, and the re- 
sponsibility must have nerved him to greater effort, 
for, after disposing of Chase, the Western champion, 
he met and rather easily defeated W. P. Knapp, a 
veteran player, who now reappeared after an absence 
of three 3-ears. This latter victory carried him into 
the final round, where he met Campbell, fresh from 
his conquest of the Englishman. The two 5-oung 
pla5'ers fought it out with determination, but the 
terrible drives of the left-handed Shaw proved too 
much for Campbell and gained the day for Boston. 

For some reason or other, Mr. Shaw failed to con- 
tinue his excellent work in the championship round 
and was easily defeated b}^ Mr. Slocum. The latter 
therefore became champion for a second time. 

Each year it becomes mere and more difficult to 
properl}- place the various players in order of 
merit. The following list is perhaps as fair as an5- : 
I, Slocum; 2, Shaw; 3, Campbell; 4, Ta^dor; 5, Chase; 
6, Clark; 7, Knapp; 8, R. P. Huntington, Jr.; 9, 
P. S. Sears ; 10, Mansfield. Of the ten men named, 
it is noticeable that every one, except the last, is a 
college man, either graduate or undergraduate. 
Shaw, Taylor, Clark and Sears are Harvard men, 
Campbell belongs to Columbia, Chase to Amherst, 
and Slocum, Knapp and Huntington owe allegiance 
to Yale. The last named is an undergraduate, who 



may well be proud, of his first year's record. His 
numerous successes, together with those of Shaw 
and Campbell, will cause 1889 ahvays to be remem- 
bered as the 3-oung pla3-ers' ^-ear. 

The following table gives in concise form the re- 
sults of the championship tournaments, which have 
been played at Newport from 1881 to 1889, inclusive : 

.SlXGtES CHA3IPIONSHIPS. 



YEAR. 


CH.\MPION. 


ALI.-COMERS, 

WINNER. 


RUNNER-rP. 


iSSi 


R. D. Sears. 




W. E. Glyn. 


l'-82 


R. D. Sears. 





C. M. Clark. 


1S83 


R. D. Sears. 




J. Dwight. 


1SS4 


R. D. Sears. 


H. A. Taylor. 


\V. V. S. Thome. 


1S85 


R. D. Sears. 


G. iVI. Erinley. 


W. P. Knapp. 


1SS6 


R. T>. Sears. 


R. L. Beeckmaii. 


H. A. Taylor. 


1SS7 


R. D. Sears. 


H. W. Slocum, Jr. 


H. A. Tavlor. 


1SS8 


H. W. Slocum, Jr. 


H. W. Slocum, Jr. 


H. A. Tavlor. 


iSSg 


H. W. Slocum, Jr. 


0„ A. Shaw, Jr. 


0. S. Campbell. 



A study of the above table is very interesting. 
The year 18S4 was the first in which the holder of 
the championship was debarred from competing in 
the All-Comers tournament, and inasmuch as Mr. 
Sears, until that year, had been compelled to play 
through the tournament, he should in equity be given 
the credit for winning three All-Comers. Mr. H., 
W. Slocum, Jr. is credited with two, w^hile no other 
pla3'er has won more than one. On the other hand, 
the record of Mr. H. A. Taylor is the most consist- 
ent (always excepting that of Mr. Sears) of any of 
those w^hose names appear in the table. Mr. Tay- 
lor won the All-Comers in 1884, since when his 
name appears in the table in every year except two, 
18S5 and 1889. and even in those j^ears he occupied 



— 154 — 

the sixth and fourth positions among the expert play- 
ers of the country. 

It is somewhat remarkable that the name of J. S. 
Clark, who has plaj^ed since 1882, and who at one 
time was the most prominent rival of Mr. Sears for 
first honors, does not anywhere appear in the above 
record . 

It is also worthy of note that a majority, or three 
of the five men, who have won the All-Comers, are 
left-handed players. The three are Messrs. Ta3dor, 
Brinley and Shaw. This fact is the more remark- 
able when it is considered, that these three men are 
the only left-handed plaj'ers whom the writer can re- 
member as having competed at Newport during the 
past six years. Yet each has achieved this high 
honor in Lawn Tennis. Does it not suggest the 
idea that the left-handed man is naturally more adept 
in the use of a racket ? There is certainl}^ an ease 
of movement, a free swing of the arm, a freedom of 
action generally, which is characteristic not onh" of 
the three pla^-ers named, but in fact of almost all 
left-handed men who attempt this game. 

The college element is again largely represented 
in the above record. Both of the champions, every 
winner of the All-Comers, except R. ly. Beeckman, 
and each runner-up except W. K. Ghm, are grad- 
uates or undergraduates of some college or univer- 
sity. Mr. Glyn is an Englishman and probably a 
graduate of some English universit}^ . The fact that 
almost all of these men were undergraduates, when 
the}^ were first successful, would indicate that a col- 
lege life affords the best training for this as well as 
the other sports. 




CHAPTER 111. 

THE CHAMPIONSHIPS OF THE U. S. N. L. T. A. 



DOUBLES. 

T^HE first championship of the United Stdtes in 
Doubles was decided at the Newport Casino in 
the year 1881, together with the Singles champion- 
ship. Three distinct styles of playing the four- 
handed game were shown in this tournament. 
The majority of the players adopted the method 
which was then commonl}' employed in the single 
gam.e; that is, both men stood at the base line and 
returned every ball from the bound. But the 
Philadelphia teams, notably Messrs. C. M. Clark 
and F. W. Taylor, and Messrs. Newbold and Van 
Rensselaer, had cultivated an entirely different 
style. By their system only one player remained 
in the back court, while the other was stationed 
close to the net, where he was always ready to 
pounce upon and "kill" any return which fell with- 
in his reach. 



1st Round. 

Gray and Sliaw, "l 

6-3,6-1. ;- 

Kessler and Glj-u, | 

Coiig'don and | 

<iaiinnell, 1 

6-2, 6-3. r 

Morse and Caldwell, I 

lluitdo1]>li and | 

liatlilxme, , 

6 5, 2-6, 63. r 

Hines and Cushnian, I 

Newbold and '\ 

Tan Rensselaer, | 

6-5,6-1. r 

Rives and Stevens, J 

Conover ami 3Iiller, ) 

6-2, 6-2. I 

H. Powel and | 

R. H. Powel, J 

Clark and Taylor, '[ 

6-5,6-2. ■ 1- 

Nightingale and Smith J 

Dwigiit and .Sear.s, ] 

6-0, 6-0. 1- 

Cog^swell and Pruyu. J 

,s. Powel and 1 

J. H. Powel, 'r 

■■ a bye. J 



— 156 



2d Round. 



3d Round. 



Gray and Slia\v, 

"4' '"'" 1 Gray and Shaw 

Cong-don and i 

Ganmiell. J 

6-5, 6-4. 
S. Powel and 1 

J. H. Powel. [ isewbold and 
'- Van 



Xewbold and | 
Van Rensselaer, J 



Conover and 
3Iiller. 

Randolph and 
Rathbone. 



Dwigjht and Sears, 1 

6-3,6-1. [ 

Clark and Taylor J 



Rensselaer. 



Final Round. 



Newbold and 
Van Rensselaer 



Champions : 

Clark and 

Taylor, 

6-5, 6-4, 6-5. 



Conover and ] 
Miller. 



6-4, 6-3. 



Clark and 
Taylor. 



Clark and 
Taylor. 



SCORE OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT OF 1881. 



NEWPORT, AUGUST 31st. 
(OLD SYSTEM OF DRAWING.) 



ist Round. 

C. M. Clark and 

F. W. Taylor, 

by default. 

Boit and Codiuan. 

Van Rensselaer and 

NeAvbold. 

5-6, 6-2, 6-3. 

Rives and Stevens. 

Glyn and E. Tln>rne, 

6-1,5-6,7-5. 

Rankincand Eldridge. 

>>i!>;iitinj;ale ah<l 

Smith, 

6-0, 6-2. 

Kneel nd and 

Rathbone. 

Conover and Miller, 

6-3. 6-2. 
Con.gdon and Rhodes. 
I'.jivei and tJolinson 

6-0, 6-2. 

Denniston andThomes 

,;. .S. Clark and 

Dixon. 

3 6, 6 2, 6-1. 

Bntler and Woodman. 

JUwii^ht and .Sears, 

a bye. 



2d Round. 

Uwigflit and 

Sears, 

6-5, 6-1. j 

Powel and Johnson J 



3d Round. 



D^vialit and "] 
Sears, 1 



6-5, 6-1. 



Van Rensselaer ~| 

and NeAvbold, „, , , 

6-5, 4-6, 9-7. i Clark and 

^' ^ ' ^ ' Taylor. 

ConoverandMiller. -' 



NigTitingale and I 

Sniltli, I NlsUtinjjale 



and Smith, 



6-3, 6-2. 



6-2, 1-6, 6-3. 

J. S. Clark and 

Dixon. 

C. 31. Clark and 1 

Taylor, I -, _ 

>. Van Ren.sselaer 

6-4, 6 o. I and Newbold. 

Glvn and Thome. 1 



Final Round. 



D^viglit and 
.Sears. 



Champions : 

Uwiglit and 

Sears. 

6-2, 6-4, 6-4. 



Nightingale 
and Smith. 



SCORE OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT OF 1882, 

NEWPORT, AUGUST 30th. 



— 150 — 

The third method was tried only by Messrs. 
Dwight and Sears, and by them with disastrous re- 
sults. Both had improved their play in Singles by 
the adoption of the volleying game at the service 
line, and both accordingly thought that the same 
tactics would serve them well in the four-handed 
game. Their positions in the court did not differ 
from those assumed by players in the double game 
of to-day, with the single exception that the latter 
approach closer to the net. 

The service line game of Messrs. Dwight and 
Sears was bound to be successful against the old 
fashioned base line play, and it won them an easy 
victory in their first match. It was decidedly dif- 
ferent, however, when the succeeding round 
brought them against the more advanced methods 
of the Philadelphians, Clark and Taylor. The 
volleying of Dwight and Sears was so weak, being 
nothing more than tapping the ball, that the Phila- 
delphian at the net was able to reach and "kill" 
almost all of their returns. Clark and Taylor, 
therefore, won an easy victory, and, in fact, no 
team was able to make any showing against 
them, except their fellow townsmen, Newbold 
and Van Rensselaer, who played the same style of 

game. 

1882. 

In August of this year the Doubles were again 
played at Newport, together with the Singles. The 
old-fashioned style of play had now almost entirely 
disappeared. The majority of the contesting 
teams, fifteen in all, adopted the Philadelphia 
game, while a few imitated Dwight and Sears. 
The Boston men now volleyed with much more 



— 160 — 

severity and accuracy, and their double game was 
therefore much improved. They met Clark and 
Taylor, their rivals of the previous 3'ear, in the third 
round, and obtained revenge by defeating them 
in two straight sets. Messrs. Nightingale and 
Smith, of Providence, had now come to be the 
most skillful exponents of the Philadelphia style, 
but after defeating Newbold and Van Rensselaer 
in the third round, they were quite easily beaten in 
the final by Dwight and Sears, w^ho thereby be- 
came the Doubles champions of the year. 
1883. 

During the early part of this 3'ear the champions 
of iSSt, Messrs. C. M. Clark and F. W. Taylor, dis- 
solved partnership, and Mr. J. S. Clark joined 
forces with his brother. The two brothers con- 
tinued to play the same style of game, in which 
practice had made them almost perfect. They suc- 
ceeded in defeating Messrs, Dwight and Sears at 
Boston, and repeated the victory in even more easy 
fashion in a return match, which was pla5'ed on 
the grounds of the St. George's Cricket Club of 
New York. This last match was decided onl}' just 
prior to the departure of the Messrs. Clark for 
England, where they afterwards met the Renshaw 
brothers. The victory at New York established 
their right to be considered the best exponents of 
the double game in the United States. 

These two defeats were also instrumental in dis- 
organizing the team work of Messrs. Dwight and 
Sears. They had previously begun to doubt the 
good policy of their service line game, and in the 
second match with the Clarks had relinquished it 
entirely, and adopted the system of their adver- 



— 163 — 

saries. This doubt and vacillation produced a 
curious effect upon their play in the next champion- 
ship tournament, which was decided at Newport in 
the month of August. Instead of there clinging to 
their service-line game, or throwing it over in favor 
of the Clark style, Dwight and Sears adopted a 
mixture of the two. One played at the net, while 
the other remained at the service line. The adop- 
tion of such a policy would have been suicidal if 
the Clark brothers had been able to play in the 
tournament. But fortunately for the Bostonians, 
they were still abroad, and Dwight and Sears were 
individually so far superior to the remainder of the 
players, that they easily retained the championship, 
notwithstanding the defects in their system. Barr- 
ing Dwight and Sears, Newbold and Van Rens- 
selaer made the strongest pair. 
1884. 
Some months after the championship tourna- 
ment of 1883, Dr. Dwight went abroad, and was 
afterwards joined by Mr. Sears. The experience 
of the two players in England, where they met the 
most skillful experts of that country, re-convinced 
them that the service-line game was the most ef- 
fective. Having returned to this country in time 
for the next tournament, which was played at New- 
port in August, 1884, they found that they were 
not the only players who had become convinced 
of the strength of the service-line game. The 
best of the entries, including the Clark brothers, 
Knapp and Thorne, of Yale, and Van Rens- 
selaer and Berry, had adopted this style of 
play. It had become a misnomer, however, to call 
it the service-line game, for the players did not ac- 



1st Round. 

r. Keene and J. S. Tookev, ( 

M. Paton and C. Munn. \ 

.S. Powel and M. Fieldini;, j 

3-6, 6-5, 6-1. J- 

F. J. Brown and W. Merriman. J 

A. Newbold and 1 

A. Van Rensselaer, I 

6-5, 6-4. f 

Rathbone and H. A. Taylor. ) 

It. F. Conover ] 

and G. M. Brinlev, I 

6-2, 6-1. ' r 

G.M.Smith and W.Gamniell,Jr J 

Shaw and H. Leeds, 1 

5 6, 6-0, 6-4. j- 

Johnson and H. W. H. Powel. J 

J. Dwigiit and R. D. Sears, ] 

6-5, 6-0. 'f 

C. Farnum and W. Dixon. I 



■184. 



2d Round. 

Xevvbold and 
Van Rensselaer, 

6-1, 6-0. 
Conover and Brinley. 



Sliaiv and Leeds, 

6-2, 6-0. 
Powel and Fielding 

Dwiglit and Sears, 

6-2, 6-0. 
Keene and Tooker. 



3d Round. 

XeAvbold and 
Van Rensse- 
laer. 

3-6, 6-5, 6-4. 



Final 
Round. 



Newbold 

and Van 

Rensselaer 



Shaw and 
Leeds. 



. J 



i Champions 
-^ DwigUt 
and 

Sears. 

6-0, 6-2, 6-2. 



Diviglit and 

Sears, 

a bye. 



Dwiglit 

aiifl 

Sears, 



SCORE OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT OF 1883. 

NEWPORT, AUGUST 21st to 24th. 



Preliminary 

Round. 
C. M. Clark ^ 

and 
J. S. Clark, 

6-3, 6-1. 
Shaw and 

Powell. J 
G. Richards 
and H. ^V. 
Slocuni, Jr. 

6-1, 6-0. 
F. W. Taylor j 
andW. Lewis. J 



1st 

Round. 

Clark and Clark, 

6-2, 6-3. 
F. Brown and 

W. Merriman. 

W. V. S. Thorne 

and W. P. Kna]>i), 

6-3, 6-2. 

P.Willis and P. Lyman. 

J. D^vight awl 

R. D. Sears, 

6-0, 6-2. 

S. H. Hooper and 

F. K. Gillett. 

R. r. Conover and 

C. W. Barnes, 

by default. 

M. Paton and Partner. 

A. A^an Rensselaer 

and W. \. R. Berry, 

6-4, 6-1. 
F;. Butler and 

H. A. Taylor. 
F. Keene and 

J. S. Tooker, 
4-6, 6-5, 6-2. 
R. L. Beecknian 

and M. Post. 
M. Fielding and 

E. Denniston, 
bv default 

F. J. Hines and Partner 

G. M. Brinley 

and A. L. Stevens, 
6-3, 36, 64. 
Richards and Slocum. 



2d 


3d 


Final 


Round. 


Round. 


Round. 


Clark and 






Clark, 






3-6, 6-2, 6-2. 


Clark and 




Clark. 




Thorne and 






Knapp. 




D^vight 




61, 1-6, 6-1. 


!- an<l 


I> wight and 
Sears, 




Sears. 








n wight 




6-0, 6-2. 


r and 




Conover and 


Sears. ■' 


Champions 


Barnes. 




Dvvight 
and 

Sears, 


Van Rensse- 




6-4, 6-1 , 8-10 


laer 




6-4. 


and Berry. 


Van Rens- 




6-1, 6-2. 


\- selaer 




and Berry 




Keene and 

Tooker. ^ 








Van Rens- 




6-1, 6-2. 


selaer 




and Berry. 


Fielding and 






Denniston, 






6-4, 6-3. 


Brinlev and 




Brinlev and 


Stevens. 




Stevens. 







SCORE OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT OF 1884. 



NEWPORT, AUG'JST 2:th to CCth. 

(drawing by BAGN.J.LI.-WII.n SYSTEM.) 



— 165 — 

tually stand at the service line, but approached 
closer to the net. 

Dvvight and Sears effectually settled the ques- 
tion of superiority between themselves and the 
Clarks, for the year 1884, by defeating the Phila- 
delphians in the third round. Van Rensselaer and 
Berry played a hard volleying game, and made a 
stubborn fight in the final round, but they, too, 
were finally obliged to succumb to Dwight and 
Sears, now champions for a third time. 
1885. 

As Dr. Dwight remained abroad during the en- 
tire summer of 1885, Mr. Sears was now obliged to 
defend his championship with another partner. 
Mr. C. M. Clark was prevented from playing by 
illness, and Mr. J. S. Clark therefore joined forces 
with Mr. Sears. This new combination was so 
strong that there was little doubt as to who would 
win the championship. Its most formidable rivals 
for the honor were Beeckman and H. A. Taylor, 
Moftatt and Davis, and Knapp and Slocum, all 
new teams. The last named player had joined 
Mr. Knapp in the absence of W. V. S. Thorne, his 
former partner. Knapp and Slocum succeeded in 
defeating both Moffatt and Davis and Beeckman 
and Taylor, and thus gained a place in the final 
round^ where they were badly beaten by Sears and 

Clark. 

1886. 

The year 1886 witnessed another shifting about 
of partners. Such continual changes in the make- 
up of the prominent teams did much to injure the 
play in the four-handed game. The name of 
alimost every player, who had been prominent in 



166- 



Preliminary Round. 
W. P. Kiiapp and 
H. W. Slocum, Jr. 

6-2, 6-0. 
F. W. Taylor and 

W. lyCwis. 
M. Fielding 

and Corse, 
by default. 
M. Paton and Partner. 
A. Moftat and 

C. B. Davis, 
6-3, 6-2. 
H. Morgan and Miller. 
H. A. Taylor an<l 
R. L. Beeckuian, 
7-5, 6-4. 
S. H. Hooper and 

F. S .Mansfield. 
P. E. Presbrey 

and F. H. Gillett, 
6-4, 3-6, 6-2. 
W. V. R. Berry and 
A. Van Rensselaer. 



ist Round. 
Knapp and ] 

Slocum, I 

6-3. 3-6, 6-4. 1- 

Taylor and | 

Beeckman. J 

Fielding and Corse 

6-3, 4-6, 6-3. 
Moilat and 

Davis. 



ad Round. Final Round. 



Knapp and ] 
Slocum, I 

S-6, 7:5- 

Moffat and 

Davis. 



R. D. Sears 
and J. S.Clark, 

6-2, 6-3. 
Smith and 

Nightingale. 



Presbrey and 

■ Gillett, 

6-3, 6-2. 
Stokes and Howe. 



Sears and 

Clark, 



5-4, 5-2. 



Presbrey and 
Gillett. 



Knapp and 

Slocum. 



Champions, 

Sears and 

Clark 

6-3, 6-0, 6-2. 



Sears and 

Clark. 



SCORE OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT OF 1885, 

NEWPORT, AUGUST 18th to 21st. 



Preliminary Round. 
F. S. Mansfield 
and S. H. Hooper, 

6-2, 6-3, 3-6, 4-6, 6-3. 
W. H. Barnes and 

O. S. Campbell. 
F. W. Taylor 

and AV. !Lewis, 
6-4, 6-5, 6-1. 
— . Gamble and 

G. McKenzie. 
J. S. Clark and 

W. V. R. Berry, 
5-4, 6-2, 4-5, 0-5, 8 6. 
C. A. Chase and 

Q. A. Shaw, Jr. 
M. Fielding and 

d'luvilliers, 
5-6, 6-5, 3-6, 5-3, 6-4. 
Tucker and A.I,.Rives. 
R. L. Beeckman 
and 
H. W. Slocum, Jr. 
6-0, 6-1, 6-5. 
Nightingale 

and Smith. 
P. S. Sears and 

H. 31. Sears, 
by default. 
Robbins and Robbins. 



ist Round. 

J. Dvvigiit 

and R. D. Sears, 

6 2, 6-1, 5-0. 
Mansfield and 

Hooper. 



Taylor and Lewis, 
by default. 
1 Clark and 
I Berry. 



Beeckman 

and Slocum 

by default. 
Fielding and 

d'Invilliers 



H. 



A. Taylor 
and 
G. M. Brinley, 

6-1, 6-4, 6-4. 
P. S. Sears and 

H. M. Sears. 



2d Round. Final Round. 



Dwight 
and Sears, 



6-5, 6-4, 3-5, }- Dwiglit and 
6-3. Sears. 



Clark and 



Berry. J 



Beeckman 
and Slocum, 



. J 



6-3,6-2,0-6,1-6, 



Taylor and 
Brinley; J 



Champions, 

Dwight and 

Sears. 

7-5, 5-7,7-5, 6-4. 



Tas'lor and 



Brinle3'. 



SCORE OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT OF 1886. 

NEWPORT, AUGUST 23d to 28th. 



— 167 — 

the Doubles of 1885, again appeared in the entry 
list of the Newport tournament of 1886, but the 
combination of names was different in every 
case. Dr. Dwight returned from England, and 
once more entered with Mr. Sears. H. A. Taylor 
played with Brinley; Slocum with Beeckman, and 
J. S. Clark with W. V. R. Berry. P. S. and H. M. 
Sears, twin brothers of the champion, now ap- 
peared for the first time and made an interesting 
pair, but were easily defeated in one of the early 
rounds by Taylor and Brinley. The latter team 
made a record which was alike surprising and 
remarkable. They defeated Beeckman and Slocum 
in a hard match of five sets, and were within an 
ace of conquering the champions in the final round. 
This final contest was the most beautiful exhibition 
of the double game ever seen at Newport. Taylor 
and Brinley not only won the first set, but also 
made the score of the second 5-4 and 40-0 in their 
favor. If they could have scored but one more 
point at that time, it is not only possible, but de- 
cidedly probable that the championship of 1886 
would have been theirs. As it happens quite often, 
however, the one last point was the hardest of 
all to win. Dwight and Sears made a successful 
stand, won the set and finally the next two. The 
play throughout was marked by long and beautiful 
rallies, and the victory was secured mainly by the 
superior position play of the champions, who stood 
close to the net and continually forced their ad- 
versaries to the back of the court. Both members 
of the defeated team were left-handed, and both 
played with all the dash and grace which seems 
peculiar to left-handed pla)^ers. 



— 1 )8 — 

1S87. 

A very important step was taken at the annual 
convention of the National Association, which was 
held in the month of March. The resolution, re- 
quiring that all matches in the championship tour- 
naments should be the best three out of five sets, had 
been passed and carried into effect the previous 
year, and it had then been discovered that the 
playing of such long matches, both in Singles and 
Doubles, produced too great a strain iipon the en- 
durance of the average contestant. It was now de- 
termined, therefore, that while the Singles champ- 
ionship should still be decided at Newport, the 
Doubles must be played elsewhere, and at a dif- 
ferent season of the year. The grounds of the 
Orange Lawn Tennis Club, at Mountain Station, 
N. J., were selected as the best for the purpose, and 
the second week in September was fixed as the 
time. This was about ten days after the champion- 
ship in Singles had been decided. 

The tournament was a failure for several reasons. 
The majority of the players become tired of Lawn 
Tennis after the Newport tournament is decided, 
and usually lay aside their rackets for the season. 
There were therefore only tv/elve entries in all, and 
of these the veteran players appeared in unusually 
bad form. Continuous rainy weather put an ad- 
ditional damper upon the sport. 

The most interesting feature was the entry of 
Messrs. McClellan and Cummins, the champion 
team of the West. They had the bad fortune to be 
drawn against Messrs. Dwight and Sears in the pre- 
liminary round, but the latter pair were in such 
poor form, that during the early part of the match 









.^^■■■^-;';/^'-^^*^_ rflHBSHJJH 








^^^^^^^^^^HjJPK. 








HB^'j^':^ ':flii 














■■ ;i^ 




- 


"•— ■-'—; 


^4 




■^'■■0W^ 




^"'^ 


-J ■■'■ m 


* 




^ 


uP^m 


>. 


1 


1^^ 


mM 



A^-c<xir>7>^^^cd^ 



— 171 — 

it seemed as if the Western champions would con- 
quer those of the East. Dwight and Sears im- 
proved, however, and secured the victory after five 
sets had been played. They then had an almost 
similar experience against Post and Cofifin in the 
first round. 

Another pair of veterans, J. S. Clark and G. M. 
Brinley, also failed to do themselves justice, and 
were defeated by O. S. Campbell and A. Duryee, 
two of the youngest players in the competition. 
The latter in turn were obliged to succumb to 
another veteran team, H. A. Taylor and Slocum. 
Dwight and Sears met Taylor and Slocum in the 
final round, and here again it became necessary to 
play the full five sets before the former won the 
match, and with it the championship of the United 
States for the fifth time. 

1888. 

At the next meeting of the Association, it was 
decided by an extremely close vote to hold the 
Doubles tournament of 1888 at Staten Island, in- 
stead of Orange. The grounds of the Staten Island 
Cricket and Base Ball Club were in every way 
suitable for the purpose, but the moving causes of 
the previous year were again instrumental in pre- 
venting the tournament from being a complete 
success. 

The dates selected, September 12th, 13th, and 
14th, were, as before, altogether too late in the 
season. Only ten teams entered, and most of these 
were from the neighborhood of New York. Messrs. 
McClellan and Cummins, however, once more came 
from the West to try conclusions with Eastern 
players. Mr. R. D. Sears' injury had obliged him 



172 ■ 



Preliminary Round. 

. IS. 31. Colgate 
g I and Partner, 

>. I F. M. Canyl 
^ [ an«l Partner. 

C.J. Post and S.A.Coffin 

6-4. 6-3, 6 I. 
M. S. Paton and Partner. 
11. D. Sears and 

J. Bwiuht, 
4-6. 6 3, 2-6, 6-1, 6-1. 

B. F. Cummins and 

E. B. BlcClellau. 
O. S. Campbell 

and A. Duryee, 
6 2, 2-6, 6-1, 3-6- 6-2. 
J.S.Clark and G.M'. Brinley 
H. A. Taylor and 

H. AV. Slociun, Jr. 
6 2, 6-3, 6-1. 
S. Campbell, Jr. 

and B. J. Carroll. 
A. E. AVriglit and 

M. K. AVriglit, 
b\- default. 

C. F. Watson and Partner. 
^ / <J. A. Shaw, Jr. 

« 1" and T. S. Tailer. 



ist Round. 

I Colgate and 1 

I W. A. BroAvn, I 

1" 7-3, 6-2, 6-0. f 

J Carr3'l and Watson. J 

Post and Coffin, j 

=. 4-6, 11-9, 6-2, 6-4. ] 

! Sears and 

1 DAviglit. J 



1 Campbell and 

I Durj'ee. 

1 6-2, 10-8, 4-6, 6-3. 

! Taylor and 

I Slooiini. 



1- Wright and Wright "1 

I I 

' 6-1, 6-2, 4-6, 6-2. I 

- Sliaw and Tailer. J 



2d Round. Final Round 



Colgate and 
Brown, 



6-1, 6-1, 7-5. 



Sears and 
Dwiglit. 



Taylor and •) 
.Slocnin. I 



Sears and 
Dwialit. 



Champions : 

Sears and 

Dwiglit. 

6-4, 3-6, 2-6, 
6-3, 6-3. 



[ Tai'lor and 
,-3,6-4,1-6,6-2. I siocum. 



Shaw and 
Tailer. J 



SCORE OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT OF 1887, 

MOUNTAIN STATION, N. J., SEPT. 6th to 9th. 



Preliminary 
Round. 

M. S. Paton 

and C. E. Sands, 
3-6, 1-6, 6-1, 7-5, 9-7. 
A. Torrenee and 
31. H. Torrence. 
E. P. 3Ie.>Iiillen 
aii<l C. Hobart, 
6-3, 7 s, 6 o. 
W. E.'oivn and 
M. F. Gocdbody. 

J. Dwicjht and 

Q. A. Shaw, Jr. 
bv default. 
E. A .'lieaeli and 
C. H. Ludington. 



ist Round. 

Torrence and Torrence, 
6 3, 6-4, 6-s. 
H. A. Taylor 

and J. S. Clark. 

A'. O. Hall and 

<). S. Campbell, 

6-2, 6 I, 6-1. 
C. J. Post and W. A. Tomes. 

li. F. Cummins and 

E. IJ. McClellan, 

6-3, 4-6, 6-4, 7-9, 6-4. 
Beach and Ludington. 
H. W. Slocum, Jr. 

and F. Keene. 
6-2, 3-6, 4-6, 7-5, 6-3. 
McMullen and Hobart. 



Final 
Round. 



Hall and 
Campbell. 



2d Round. 



Taylor and 
Clark, 

6-2, 3-6, 7-5, 6-3 



Hall and 
Camjibell. 

Champions : 
Hall and Cami)beH 

64, 6-2, 6-4. 
Cummins -, 

and 

McClellan, 

6-2,5-7,6-4,6-3 

McMullen j 

and Hobart J 



McMullen 
and Hobart. 



SCORE OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT OF 1888, 

STATEN ISLAND, SEPT. 12th to 16th. 



— 1''3 - 

to withdraw altogether, and his former partner, 
Dr. Dwight, was also absent. This was therefore 
the first tournament of the Association, since its 
organization in 1881, in which neither of these 
sterling pla)^ers appeared as a competitor. In ad- 
dition, a succession of rainy days had softened the 
courts and rendered them almost unfit for play. 

But notwithstanding all this, some of the play- 
ing was decidedly good. The chief honors went to 
a new combination, consisting of Messrs. O. S. 
Campbell and V. G. Hall, who lost but a single set 
in the entire play, and that to Messrs. H. A. Tay- 
lor and J. S. Clark. Mr. Foxhall Keene and Mr. 
H. W. Slocum, Jr. had formed a partnership, but 
they were defeated in the first round by another 
New York team, Messrs. McMullen and Hobart. 
The latter seemed unable to stand against the 
magnificent net play of Hall and Campbell, and 
were easily beaten by them in the final round. 
Hall and Campbell, at the time of winning this 
championship, were still undergraduates of Co- 
lumbia College. To them belongs the honor of 
bringing the Doubles championship to New York 
for the first time. 

1889. 

The experience of the last two 3'ears had now 
taught its lesson, and the Association determined 
to play the Doubles during the first week in July, 
hoping that the early-summer enthusiasm of the 
players would swell the entry list to greater pro- 
portions. The well kept grounds of the Staten 
Island Club were again selected, but the tourna- 
ment was hardly a success. The number of entries 
was even smaller than before, and a storm of unusual 



— 174 — 

violence caused a postponement for an entire week. 
The playing would call for but little comment 
had it not been for its brilliant termination. 
Messrs. H. A. Taylor and H. W. Slocum, Jr., met 
Messrs. O. S. Campbell and V. G. Hall, the cham- 
pions of 1888, in the final round, and this match, 
played in the presence of a large and enthusiastic 
crowd of spectators, was remarkable in many re- 
spects. While the rallies were long and brilliant, 
the volleying was nevertheless accurate and hard. 
Every set was close and fought to the bitter end. 
Forty-four games were played before the first two 
sets were decided. Taken all in all, it was perhaps 
the most interesting match in the history of the 
Doubles championships, with the possible ex- 
ception of that played by Dwight and Sears 



Preliminary 


ISt 


2d 


Final 


Round. 


Round. 


Round. 


Round. 


A. E. Wriglit 


Wright and 1 






and 


Miller, 






D, Miller, 


6-4, 6-3, 6-4. 


Beach and 




6-4, 7-5, 6-2. 
I,. W.Glazebi-ook 


F. 0. Beach 
and 


Hunting- 
ton, 




and 


R. P. Hunting- 




Taylor and 


K. I.. V. Hoppin. 


ton, Jr. 


6-3, 6-3, 6-1. 




C. Hobart, and 


Hobart and Post, 




Slocum, 


A. W. Post, 


8-6, 6-4, 6-2. 


Taylor 




6-2, 6-2, 8-6. 


H. A. Taylor 


and 




C. J. Post, Jr. 


and H. W. 


Slocum. 


Champions : 


and S. V. Coffin. J 


Slocvini, Jr. 




Taylor and 




J. A. Rome and 




Slocum. 




0. A. \^ailis. 




14-12, 10-8, 6-4. 




6-1, 4-6, 8-6, 6-1. 


Rome and 






S. W. Smith and 


Willis, 






M. DeGarmen- 




Hall and 




dia. 
V. G. Hall and ' 
O.S.Campbell, 

6-3> 6-3, 6-1. 


9-7. 3-6, 6-1, 
6-3. 

Hall and 


Campbell. 




F. D. Pavey and 
W. A. Tomes. 


Campbell 





SCORE OFTHE CHAMPIONSHIP TOURNAMENT OF 1889- 

STATEN ISLAND, JULY 1st to 10th. 



against Brinley and Taylor in the Newport tour- 
nament of iSS6. Taylor and Slocum finally won, 
however, in three straight sets, thus completing 
the tournament and securing the championship 
for 1S89, without losing a single set. 

The following table gives in condensed form the 
main facts relating to the Doubles championships, 
from 18S1 to 1889, inclusive: 



DOUBLES CHAMPIONSHIPS. 



YEAR PLAYED AT 



CHAMPIPNS. 



RUNNERS-UP. 



iSSi 


Newport. 


I8S2 


Newport. 


IS83 


Newport. 


I8S4 


Newport. 


1885 


Newport. 


IS86 


Newport. 


I8S7 


Orange, N.J 


18S8 


Stateu Isl'd 


1889 


Staten Isl'd 



C. M. Clark and F.W.Taylor. 
R. D. Sears and J. Dwight. 
R. D. Sears and J. Dwight. 
R. D. Sears and J. Dwight. 
R. D. Sears and J. S. Clark. 
R. D. Sears and J. Dwight. 
R. D. Sears and J. Dwight. 

V.G.Hall and O.S. Campbell. 

H. A. Taylor and 

H. W. Slocum, Jr. 



( A. Newbold, 

( A. Van Rensselaer. 

jG. A. Smith, 

( Nightingale. 

( A. Newbold. 

( A. Van Rensselaer. 

I W. V. R. Berrj', 

"i A. VanRensselaer. 

\ W. P. Knapp, 

/ H.W. Slocum, Jr. 

( H. A. Taylor, 

■/ G. M. Bnnley. 

\ H. A. Taylor, 

/ H. W. Slocum, Jr. 

( E;. p. McMuUen, 

"/ C. Hobart. 

i V. G. Hall, 

■/ O. S. Campbell. 




CHAPTER IV. 



OUR PLAYFRS ABROAD. 



J^TeSSRS. C. M. and J. S. Clark, of Phila- 
v^ delphia, were the first of our represen- 
tative players to journey abroad and try con- 
clusions with the champions of England. In the 
early summer of 1883, the Clark brothers were 
close rivals of Messrs. Dwight and Sears for the 
honor of being considered the best exponents of the 
double game in the United States. These two teams 
were far superior to all others. To settle the ques- 
tion of supremacy between themselves, two matches 
were played, one at Boston on the 21st of June, and 
another at New York five days later, both of which 
were won by the Clarks. Having thus fairl}^ 
earned the foremost place among our double 
players, the Philadelphians sailed for England, and 
immediately upon their arrival, arranged a four- 
handed match with the Renshaw brothers, the 
famous champions. It must not be understood 
that the Clarks went abroad with the sole idea of 



— 179 — 

representing the United States in an international 
contest. Having secured the foremost place in 
their own countr}', it was but natural, as an in- 
cident of their foreign trip, that they should desire 
to meet the more experienced players of England. 

The first match with the Renshaws was played 
on the All England Club ground at Wimbledon, on 
the 1 8th of July, 1883. The Clarks pla3^ed one 
man at the net and the other in the back court, 
and made a very creditable showing against the 
volleying game of the English champions. They 
lost the first set, and also the second, but the latter 
only after they had been within one point of win- 
ning it. The third they won easily. The final 
score in favor of the Renshaws was 6-4, S-6, 3-6, 
6-1. 

The American players were not entirely satisfied 
with the result of this contest, and a return match 
was therefore played. The following report is 
taken from the "London Field:" 

"The return match was played off on Monday, July 23d, 
on the All England Club ground at Wimbledon, and once 
more resulted in a victory for the home team even still more 
easily than on the previous occasion, the Cheltenham pair 
now gaining three sets in succession, and eighteen games to 
eight. Seven games out of the eighteen were called deuce; 
in one of them — the opening game of the second set — advan- 
tage and deuce was called eight times, and two were love 
games to the English pair and one to the Americans. The 
Messrs. Renshaw played better together than in the first 
match, but still did not show up in the form that they have 
been seen to play in. Their fault now seems to be that they 
are too much at the net together. This, of course, at times, 
when they have their opponents at a disadvantage, is no 
doubt a winning game, but when done as a rule, too often 
causes them to play on the defensive, when if they had 



— 180 — 

bided their time, they would have themselves been able to 
assume the offensive. The Americans are certainly good 
servers, being far more sure of their first services than a 
majority of English players. Their service might be called 
the round-arm over-hand, as it is really a mixture of the two. 
As a rule, their net man stands too close to the net, though 
at times he makes some beautiful short strokes, but the 
English pair found that it was not a diffioult task to return 
the ball down the side lines out of his reach.'' 

The Clarks also played with varying fortune in 
both the Singles and Doubles of several English 
tournaments. They captured a number of prizes, 
but perhaps their most notable performance was in 
the Redhills tournament, near London. Here Mr. 
J. S. Clark took second prize in Singles, and the 
two brothers won their way into the final round of 
Doubles, where they met Messrs. Lewis and 
Williams, two excellent players. The Americans 
had won two sets out of the first three, when rain 
interfered with the completion of the match, and 
the Clarks foolishly agreed to finish at the con- 
clusion of their second contest with the Renshaws. 
The agreement was carried out, however, and 
Lewis and Williams won the two remaining sets 
and the first prizes in Doubles. 



Late in the autumn of 1883, Dr. James Dwight, 
of Boston, journeyed to England with the intention 
of meeting the Lawn Tennis "cracks" of that 
country. He bore letters of introduction to Mr. 
Wm. Renshaw, and almost imrnediately upon his 
arrival was able to secure an afternoon's play with 
the English champion in the Maida Vale covered 
court. Soon afterwards Dr. Dwight departed for 
Cannes, in the south of France, and there spent the 



— 181 — 

winter in company with Messrs. W. Renshaw, Farrer, 
and Grove, all English players of prominence. 
Mr. R. D. Sears, Dr. Dwight's partner in Doubles, 
also joined the party early in the spring. The win- 
ter practice of these players upon the gravel courts 
at Cannes, the most perfect in the world, enabled 
them to open the season of 1S84 in the best of 
form. 

The first notable tournament of 1884, in which 
the Americans competed, was the Irish champion- 
ship meeting, held at Fitzwilliafn Square, in the 
city of Dublin. In addition to Messrs. Dwight and 
Sears, Mr. A. L. Rives, also of Boston, was among 
the entries. Mr. B. S. De Garmendia, too, al- 
though accredited to France, was really a repre- 
sentative of the United States, where he has 
since been prominent in various departments of 
athletics, but particularly during recent years as 
the champion of the New York Racket Court Club. 
Mr. De Garmendia and Mr. Rives were defeated in 
their first matches, but Dr. Dwight and Mr. Sears 
made a very creditable showing. Dr. Dwight won 
a place in the third round, where he was defeated 
by H. M. McKay, one of the strongest players 
among the Englishmen — (6-3, 6-4, 6-3). Mr. 
Sears performed still better. He played through 
the first three rounds without losing a set, and in 
the fourth made a strong stand, especially in the 
first set, against the famous H. F. Lawford, who 
afterwards won the tournament and defeated E. 
Renshaw for the championship of Ireland. The 
score of Lawford against Sears was 6-4, 6-3, 6-2, 
and that of Lawford vs. E. Renshaw was 6-1, 6-4, 
6-2. Although no one would think of claiming 



— 182 — 

that Mr. Sears was the equal of Mr. E. Renshaw at 
this time, it was nevertheless creditable, that of 
the two players, the American should have suc- 
ceeded in winning the greater number of games 
from Lawford. 

In the doubles, Messrs. Dwight and Sears were 
unfortunate enough to draw against E. L. Williams 
and E. Lewis, one of the strongest teams, in the 
first round. They were defeated, 7-5, 6-0. 

Directly after the Irish championship meeting, 
Messrs. Dwight and Sears were entered at the Bath 
tournament, but Mr, Sears injured his foot and 
was obliged to withdraw, while Dr. Dwight was 
defeated in the first round of Singles. At Chelten- 
ham Mr. Sears won a place in the final round, and 
was then defeated by a strong player, Mr. Donald 
Stewart — (10-8, 6-1, 6-3). Dwight and Sears 
should have won the Doubles at the same place, 
but after being within one point of winning the 
final match, they went entirely to pieces, and were 
defeated by Capt. C. K. Wood and C. L. Sweet — 
(6-3, 3-6, 2-6, 6-5, 6-0). 

At the Northern tournament, held in the vicinity 
of Liverpool, the Americans made a still better 
record. It is a singular coincidence, that in the 
second round of the Singles, Messrs. Dwight and 
C-ears should have drawn against and defeated 
Mr. J. B. Ismay and Mr. J. A. Rome, both English- 
men, who have since become residents of the 
United States. Dwight and Sears were then suc- 
cessively defeated by Donald Stewart, who won the 
tournament. In the Doubles Messrs. Dwight and 
Sears were entirely successful, beating H. W. Wil- 
berforce and H. V. Macnachten in the final round — 



— 183 — 

(2-6, 6-1, 6-4, 8-6). This victory brought them 
against the Renshaw brothers for the northern 
championship, and thus the Doubles Champions of 
England and the United States were for the first 
time matched in tournament play. The Renshaws 
of course won, but the three sets were well played 
and exciting — (6-2, 6-4, 6-3). 

The All England championships were held at 
Wimbledon in July, and here again Mr. Sears was 
unable to compete in the Singles, this time on ac- 
count of an injured wrist. Dr. Dwight played, 
however, and easily won his first match. In the 
second round he was defeated by H. Chipp, but 
not until five hard sets had been played. It would 
appear from the following account (from " London 
Pastime") of the final and deciding set, that ill 
luck had much to do with the Doctor's defeat: 

"The score standing at two sets all, ends were changed 
with every game. Dwight secured the first game to thirty, 
and Chipp brought matters even by winning the next at the 
same score. Dwight won the next four games, two being love 
ones and one at deuce, thus making the score 5-r in his 
favor. Chipp woke up a little and won the next game to 
fifteen, but the eighth was very hotly contested, deuce being 
called six times, and Dwight being three times within one 
point of winning the match. A false bound had now a great 
effect upon the game, the American being the sufferer, and 
Chipp won. He also secured the next two games to thirty, 
and ' games all ' was called. Chipp still having some good 
luck, next won a love game, and winning the twelfth to 
thirty, secured the set and match after one of the best con- 
tests of the meeting. The battle of the styles was fought 
again in this match, Dwight being a volleyer of the most 
pronounced type, while Chipp relies solely on his back play. 
Dwight's volleying and general play was very much ad- 
mired, and though beaten, he was far, very far from being 
disgraced." 



— 184 — 

The Singles were won by H. F. Lawford, who 
was then defeated by W. Renshaw for the cham- 
pionship — (6-0, 6-4, 9-7). 

In the first round of Doubles, Dwight and Sears 
defeated J. T. Hartley and R. T. Richardson (6-2, 
6-^, 8-6), a team which had won the championship 
of England in 1882. In the second round they 
drew a bye, but in the third met their Waterloo at 
the hands of W. and E. Renshaw (6-0, 6-1, 6-2,) 
who then defeated E. Lewis and E. L. Williams, 
and thereby won the Doubles championship for 
1884. 

Immediately after the championships were de- 
cided, Messrs. Sears and Dwight returned to the 
United States, the former bringing with him the 
racket with which W. Renshaw had won the 
English championships of 1882 and 1883. 

Shortly after the season of play in the United 
States had ended. Dr. Dwight again went abroad, 
and, as before, spent the entire winter at Cannes, 
in the company of W. Renshaw, H. Grove, G. H. 
Taylor, and other English players of note. The 
beginning of 1885 found Dr. Dwight in much 
better form than at any time during the previous 
year, and his record of the entire season was so 
brilliant as to earn for him a high place among the 
English experts. He opened the season by win- 
ning both Singles and Doubles at Brighton, the 
latter event with C. H. A. Ross as a partner. 
Alter this victory he was a competitor in all 
the notable English tournaments, and almost al- 
ways succeeded in carrying off a first prize, either 
in Singles or Doubles. His usual partner in 
Doubles was E. Lewis, but he also played in dif- 



— 185 - 

ferent tournaments with W. Renshaw, Donald 
Stewart, H. Grove and J. C. McKay. 

Dr. Dwight's most notable performance of the 
year, however, was in the Northern Championship 
meeting at Manchester. There he not only suc- 
ceeded in winning the tournament, defeating E. 
Lewis in the final round {8-6, 6-0, 6-4), but also 
followed this by wresting the Northern Champion- 
ship from Donald Stewart, the holder — (6-2, 6-4, 
6-4). In the Doubles, Dwight and Lewis gained a 
place in the final round, but were there defeated 
by the Renshaw brothers — (6-1, 6-1, 7-5). 

In the All England Championships, also, Dr. 
Dwight made a creditable record. He was pos- 
sibly nerved to greater effort by the fact that this 
tournament was begun on the Fourth of July. He 
played through the first three rounds without los- 
ing a set, and finally succumbed (6-2, 6-2, 6-3) 
only to the great Lawford, who was then at his 
best. That Dwight's defeat was not a discreditable 
one is shown by the fact that in the following 
round Lawford also defeated E. Renshaw, and 
afterwards made a most stubborn fight against W. 
Renshaw for the championship — (7-5, 6-2, 4-6, 7-5). 

In the championship Doubles, Dwight and Lewis 
defeated such a strong team as Chipp afld E. Bar- 
ratt-Smith {6-;^, 6-0, 11-9), and made a magnifi- 
cent struggle against the champion Renshaws, 
winning one set and losing two others by close 
scores. The final score in favor of the Renshaws 
was 4-6, 6-1, 6-4, 6-4. 

During the entire season of 1885, Dr. Dwight 
took part in thirteen tournaments. In almost all 
of these he played in both Singles and Doubles, 



— 186 — 

and frequently in the Ladies and Gentlemen's 
Doubles. He won in all thirteen first and eight 
second prizes. 

At the end of each year's play, it has been the 
custom of " London Pastime" to publish a classifi- 
cation of the prominent players, based upon the 
records of the entire season. The following, which 
was published in 1S85, shows Dr. Dwight's position 
among the English experts of that year : 

W. Renshaw Scratch 

H. F. Lawford 2 Bisques 

E. Renshaw Half 15 

E. de S. H. Browne . } 

IT /-u .. . r Half 15 and i Bisque 

E. Chatterton ) ^ ^ 

W. J. Hamilton .... Half 15 and 2 Bisques 

H. K. McKay 15 

Hon. P. B. Lyon ...."] 

H. Chipp . . I 

, „ . , ;> 15 and I Bisque 

J. Dwight i ^ ^ 

E. Lewis I 

H. Grove } 

,-15 and 2 Bisques 
C. H. A. Ross \ 

W. C. Taylor Half 30 

Dr. Dwight returned to the United States too 
late to compete in the Newport tournament of 
1885. The following winter, like the two previous, 
was spent at Cannes. Messrs. E. Renshaw, Grove, 
Stanley, and R. D. Sears were also there. The 
latter, however, was obliged to return to the 
United States before the close of the winter. 
Early in the spring of 1886, Mr. R. L. Beeckman, 
of New York, joined the colony of players. 
Shortly after his arrival, a handicap tournament 



— 187 — 

was arranged, and proved to be very interesting. 
Mr. E. Renshaw was placed in a class by himself, 
owing half fifteen, and in addition conceding i 
bisque to the players of Class II., who were Messrs. 
Dwight, Grove and Beeckman. The remaining 
contestants received large handicaps. Curiously 
enough, Mr. Renshaw won the prize by suc- 
cessively defeating each player of Class II. He 
won from Dr. Dv/ight in three straight sets ; 
from Mr. Grove by three sets to one, and from Mr. 
Beeckman, in the final round, by three sets to two. 
The latter played in admirable form, and was de- 
feated only by the following close score — 6-4, 5-7, 
6-3, 4-6, 6-4. 

During the playing season of 1886, Mr. Dwight 
once more participated in the English tournaments, 
but not so frequently as in 1885, nor with such 
brilliant success. His most notable victory was 
won at the Bath meeting, where he defeated the 
famous Irish player, E. de S. H, Browne, and also 
H. Grove, thereby winning the West of England 
Championship. He was beaten by Browne at 
Cheltenham, however, and a week later, at Liver- 
pool, was compelled to relinquish the Northern 
championship to Grove. This last defeat was cer- 
tainly not a discreditable one, for Grove was play- 
ing in magnificent form, and had already won from 
E. Renshaw before meeting Dr. Dwight. Dwight 
and Grove played together in the Doubles, and 
won the All-Comers tournament, but were defeated 
by W. and E. Renshaw for the Northern Champion- 
ship. 

This virtually completed Dr. Dvvight's foreign 
play for the season of 1886. Without remaining 



— 188- 

for the decision of the All-England Championships, 
he returned to the United States, and afterwards 
played in the All-Comers tournament at Newport. 
(Part II. Chap. II.) Later in the year the " Lon- 
don Pastime" published a short sketch of Dr. 
Dwight's career, from which the following is an ex- 
tract: 

"The strength of Dwight's game consists in his wonderful 
proficiency in volleying, in which he is equalled by one or 
two players, at most; its weakness is his back-play, although 
he has lately made some improvement in this respect. He 
is especially good at volleying tosses and high-pitched balls, 
which he returns with great certainty and considerable force. 
What is, however, especially worthy of notice, is his won- 
derful knowledge of the game, the excellent judgment with 
which he takes note of the weak points of his antagonist, 
and the manner in which he avails himself of any openings 
that present themselves in the heat of contest. He has an 
unequalled masterjr of the theory of the modern game, which 
he has ably formulated after careful study of the examples 
of the English champion and other great players, with whom 
he has for some three years had the advantage of almost 
daily practice." 

At the end of the year J 886, " Pastime" also pub- 
lished the following classification, showing that 
Dr. Dv/ight had more than held his own since the 
classification of 1885: 

W. Renshaw • . Scratch 

H. F. Lawford 2 Bisques 

E. L. Lewis ~| 

H. Grove j 

E. Renshav^ [- Half 15 

E. de S. H. Browne I 

I 
Eyrer Chatterton J 

W. J. Hamilton . . . . ^ 

J. Dwight ^ Half 15 and i Bisque 

F. L. Williams , . . . ) 



— 189 — 

H. W. W. Wilberforce . Half 15 and 2 Bisques 

P. B. Lyon \ 

H. Chipp M5 

C. L. Sweet ) 

C. H. A. Ross ) 

■iiT VT r- t, u (■ 15 and one Bisque 

W. N. Cobold ) ^ 

J. H. Crispe \ 

J. R. Deykin r 15 and 5 Bisques 

E. G. Meers ' 

Dr. Dwight also spent the summer of 1887 in 
England but played in only a few of the tourna- 
ments. He lost the West of England champion- 
ship to Grove, but captured the Singles at Leam- 
ington, and elsewhere added to the laurels which 
he had won during the three previous years. This 
was his last experience in England, however, and 
as no other representative player of the United 
States has ventured abroad during recent years, 
we have since had no test of the comparative 
merits of the players of the two countries, except 
such as was afforded by the visit of Mr. E. G. Meers 
to the United States in the summer of 1889. (Part 
II. Chap. II.) 




CHAPTER V. 



THE INTER-COLLEGIATE ASSOCIATION. 



IVo HISTORY of Ivawn Tennis in the United 
■^-^ States would be complete without some ref- 
erence to the Inter-Collegiate Association. The tour- 
naments of this Association have been second onl}^ to 
the national championships in importance and in- 
terest ; and naturally so, for it is the college players, 
in almost every year, who have gained the highest 
distinction in I^awn Tennis. 

The organization of the Inter-Collegiate Associa- 
tion was decidedly informal. I^awn Tennis had 
been so rapidly gaining a place in popular favor that 
finally, in the spring of 1883, the representative 
players of some of the larger colleges came to the 
conclusion that the game ought to be recognized in 
some degree as a college sport. Correspondence fol- 
lowed, and on the 5th of June, 1883, representatives 
of Harvard, Yale, Brown, Amherst and Trinity met 



—193 — 

at Hartford, the seat of the last named college, and 
organized the Inter-Collegiate I^awn Tennis Associa- 
tion. Mr. J. S. Clark was chosen as the first president. 

The Association was no sooner organized than it 
proceeded to hold its first championship meeting 
(June 6th and 7th). This tournament was played 
on the beautiful grounds of the Hartford Retreat for 
the Insane, and among the spectators were many of 
the insane patients, who appeared to thoroughly ap- 
preciate the efforts of the contestants. Harvard was 
represented by J. S. Clark in the Singles, and by 
the same plaj^er, with H. A. Taylor, in the Doubles ; 
Yale, by G. L,. Sargent in the Singles, and by H. 
W. Slocum, Jr. and W. C. Camp, the famous Foot- 
Ball player, in the Doubles ; Brown, by Barker in 
the Singles, and Barker and Hill in the Doubles ; 
while Amherst and Trinity were also represented in 
both events. 

Mr. R. D. Sears was then a senior at Harvard, but 
was prevented by illness from competing in this tour- 
nament. It is not generally known that Mr. J. S. 
Clark was at this time nearh^, if not quite, equal in 
skill to Mr. Sears. He had defeated him in the 
Har\^ard College tournament, and repeated the vic- 
tory in a match which was contested at I^ongwood 
shortly after the Inter-Collegiate tournament had 
been decided. It is small wonder, then, that Mr. 
Clark should have proved an easy winner of the 
first inter-collegiate contest. He defeated Sargent 
of Yale, Barker of Brown, Curts of Trinitj' and Com- 
stock of Amherst in rapid succession, and Sargent 
won second place for Yale by defeating all of the 
others, except Clark. Harvard also captured the 



— 191 — 

championship in Doubles, Clark and Taylor win- 
ning with ease from each team, except Hill and 
Barker, of Brown, who made a hard fight for the 
honor, and lost the final and deciding set only by 
the close score of 7-5. 

It was shortly afterwards decided that the autumn 
was, for many reasons, a better season of the 3^ear 
in which to hold an inter-collegiate contest in I^awn 
Tennis, and another tournament was accordingly 
played in October, 1883. The grounds of the Hart- 
ford Retreat for the Insane were again selected, and 
the same colleges were represented, but this time 
by entirely different players. Hai-vard and Yale 
again furnished by far the best of the entries, and 
the remainder of the colleges were hardly in the 
fight. H. A. Taylor won the championship in Sin- 
gles for Harvard, his nearest opponents being W. 
V. S Thorne and W. P. Knapp, of Yale. The two 
last named players made a strong fight in the 
Doubles against H. A. Taylor and P. B. Presbrey, 
but that championship, like all the others, finally 
went to Harvard. 

Up to this time, Harvard had enjoyed a monopoly 
in the winning of championships, but a break in her 
series of victories was soon to come. The colleges 
again met at Hartford in October, 1884, ^^^^ several 
new members of the Association, including Prince- 
ton and Wesleyan, now sent representatives. Trinitj^ 
was represented by Mr. G. M. Brinley, and for the 
first time became an important factor in the struggle. 
Mr. R. D. Sears had entered the Medical School of 
Han-ard University, and as he now appeared in com- 
pany with Mr. H. A. Taylor, it seemed almost cer- 



— 195 — 

tain that Han-ard would repeat her successes of the 
two previous years. 

The tournament was a memorable one, marked as 
it was by one of the few defeats which Mr. Sears 
has sustained in this covintrj-. As the play in Sin- 
gles progressed, the issue narrowed down to four 
men, Sears and Taylor of Harvard, Knapp of Yale, 
and Brinle}^ of Trinity. Knapp was drawn against 
Sears, and, to the intense surprise of every one, de- 
feated the champion of the United States with com- 
parative ease. While great credit was due the Yale 
man, it is not unfair to say that the poor condition 
of the turf courts was largely responsible for Sears' 
defeat. Knapp played a typical volleying game, 
gaining his position at the net at all hazards, while 
Sears was altogether too content to remain in the 
back court, trusting to pass his adversary. A num- 
ber of bad bounds did much to ipjure his chances, 
and Knapp was not slow in taking advantage of the 
circumstances. 

The misfortunes of Harvard did not come singlj'^, 
however. After Taylor had won the first set from 
Brinley and had made a good beginning in the second, 
he fell and sprained his wrist so badly as to necessi- 
tate his withdrawal. Thus Trinity and Yale were 
left to contest the final round, and although Brinley 
won the first two sets and lacked but a single game 
of the third, Knapp still persisted and was finallj- 
rewarded b}- securing Yale's first championship in 
Lawn Tennis. 

Sears and Taylor having been obliged to withdraw 
also from the Doubles, that championship likewise 
went to Yale, Knapp and Thorne defeating Brinley 
and Paddock, of Trinit}^, in the final round. 



— 196 — 

The turf courts at Hartford had been so unsatis- 
factory throughout the last meeting, that the Asso- 
ciation now decided, for this as well as other reasons, 
to hold the next tournament on the grounds of the 
New Haven lyawn Club, an organization located in 
the same citj', but having no connection whatever 
with Yale College. Some of the players objected 
to earth courts, which are universall}' used in New 
Haven, but the situation of the club was so central 
and the management of the first tournament so sat- 
isfactory, that the Association has never since seen 
fit to make a change. 

The championship tournament of 1885 was begun 
on the 15th of October. The membership of the Asso- 
ciation had now largely increased, Amherst, Brown, 
lychigh, Princeton, Trinity, Williams, Wesleyan and 
Yale sending representatives. As many as twenty- 
two players were entered, the most prominent of 
whom were the Sears brothers of Har\^ard, Larkin 
of Princeton, C. A. Chase of Amherst, Brinley and 
Paddock of Trinitj^, Davis of Lehigh, and Knapp 
and Thacher of Yale. Kabayama, a young Jap- 
anese student of Wesleyan, was also among the 
entries. 

The Singles were chiefly notable for the unex- 
pectedly good play of Mr. A. Duryee, a prominent 
athlete of Williams College. He won his way into 
the final round, and there met the Yale representa- 
tive, Knapp, who had won the championship in 1884. 
This match was long and well fought, Yale finally 
winning by the following remarkable score, 10-8, 
10-8, 6-3. 

Mr. W. V. S. Thorne, Knapp's former partner, 
had graduated from Yale, but the latter, with H. W. 




^s^i-^^^^J^f" 



— 199 — 

Shipmaii, succeeded in retaining the championship 
in Doubles for Yale, Brinley and Paddock, of Trin- 
ity', again making the hardest fight. 

The championship meeting of 1886 was also very 
successful. It was held in October on the grounds 
of the New Haven Lawn Club. Columbia and 
Cornell had recently joined the Association, but the 
latter sent no representatives. Columbia's players 
were Messrs. V. G. Hall, J. Bacon, C. E. Sands, 
Smith and Strebeigh. 

The tournament was remarkable for the brilliant 
work of Brinley, of Trinity. Knapp of Yale, who 
had been the only one to defeat the Trinity player 
in 1884 and 1885, was now absent from the Singles, 
and Brinlc)^ won the championship without losing a 
single set. A fair sample of his excellent play was 
shown in the final match against P. S. Sears of Har- 
vard. Although the latter was an excellent player 
and appeared in good form, Brinley scored the first 
eleven games in rapid succession, allowing his ad- 
versary only an occasional point. 

Mr. Knapp was in the Doubles, however, and this 
time with still another partner, Mr. W. D. Thacher. 
For the third year in succession, the Doubles Cham- 
pionship became an issue between Knapp and part- 
ner, of Yale, and Brinley and Paddock, of Trinity, 
and once more did Knapp's presence prove disastrous 
to Trinity's chances. Four sets were played, all 
close and exciting, but the championship finally 
went to Yale by the following score, 7-9, 7-5, 7-5, 
6-4. 

During the year 1887, the Universit}^ of Pennsyl- 
vania became a member of the Association, and sent 
A. G. Thomson and W. B. Henry to the annual 



— 200 — 

tournament, which began on the nth of October at 
New Haven. Eleven colleges, a greater number 
than e\-er before, were represented. The most 
prominent of the new players were Q. A. Shaw, Jr., 
of Harvard, and O. S. Campbell, of Columbia, both 
of whom have since gained distinction in the national 
championships at Newport. Knapp had now left 
Yale, and that college was represented by Thacher, 
Ludington, Shipman and Hurd. Brinley, of Trin- 
ity, was the only veteran pla3'er who appeared. 

The brilliant pla^'ing of the Har^^ard delegation 
was the striking feature of the tournament. Harvard 
had been unable to make even a fair showing since 
the graduation of R. D. Sears, J. S. Clark and H. A. 
Taylor, but now her representatives played with 
some of the old time skill and captured all of the 
honors. P. S. Sears won the Singles championship, 
defeating most of the good plaj^ers, including Weeden 
of Brown, Campbell of Columbia, Brinle}^ of Trinitj', 
and in the final round, the other representative of his 
own college, Q. A. Shaw, Jr. 

It had been supposed that V. G. Hall and O. S. 
Campbell, of Columbia, would win the champion- 
ship in Doubles, but here again Harvard proved vic- 
torious. Sears and Shaw were the winners. 

The pla}' in the tournament of the following }'ear, 
i88S, was almost a repetition of that of 18S7. The, 
same Harvard and Columbia men met in the final 
round of Doubles, but Hall and Campbell had now 
so improved in skill, that the}^ were able to turn the 
tables on Sears and Shaw (7-5. 6-2, 6-3). and add 
the inter-collegiate championship to the still greater 
honor which thc}^ had won earlier in the season, 
viz., the Doubles championship of the United 



— 201 — 

States. In the Singles, Sears repeated his victory 
of the year before, but onh' after a most desperate 
resistance from each of the Columbia players. He 
defeated Campbell in the semi-finals by a close score 
(6-3. 5-7. 8-6, 6-4), and in the final and champion- 
ship round, against V. G. Hall, it became necessary 
to play the full five sets (7-5, 4-6, 6-2, 4-0. 6-2). 
Harvard's victory was therefore well earned. 

The inter-collegiate tournament of 1889 was some- 
what disappointing as an exhibition of Lawn Tennis 
skill, but decidedly interesting in its results. When 
it became certain that Q. A. Shaw, Jr., of Harvard, 
would be unable to play, it was generall}^ supposed 
that O. S. Campbell, of Columbia, who had shortlj^ 
before made a brilliant record in the All-Comers 
tournament at Newport, would win an easj- victor}' 
in the Singles. It was a great surprise, there- 
fore, when he was defeated b}- Hovey, of Brown, a 
clever but not first-class pla3-er, in the second round. 

With P. S. Sears graduated and Shaw unable to 
play. Harvard had no chance to win. Her represen- 
tati^'es were Messrs. Kingsle}' and Tallant. After 
Campbell had been disposed of by Hove}', the cham- 
pionship became almost a certainty for Yale. It is 
not often that a Lawn Tennis player, in his very 
first year of tournament play, is able to make his 
way into the front ranks and finally end by captur- 
ing the inter-colle^iate championship ; but such 
was the experience of R. P. Huntington, Jr., of 
Yale, in 1S89. G. A. Hurd, another Yale man, 
pla}'ed an exceedingly pluck}' game, and won the 
right to contest the final match with Huntington. 
The two Yale men fought it out, as did Sears and 



— 202 — 

Shaw of Harvard, in 1887, and Huntington won in 
straight sets (11-9, 7-5, 6-1). 

V. G. Hall had graduated from Columbia, and O. 
S. Campbell therefore played in the Doubles with A. 

E. Wright, of the Columbia I^aw School and formerly 
of Trinity. This combination was strong enough to 
win the Doubles championship, though R. P. and 

F. Huntington, of Yale, gave them a hard fight in 
the final round (6-4, 6-8, 7-5, 6-4). 

The following table gives the complete statistics 
of the inter-collegiate championships from 1883 to 
1889, inclusive: 



PLAYED AT 



Spring 

1883 

Fall 

1S83 

1S84 
1885 
1886 
1S87 
1888 



Hartford. 
Hartford. 
Hartford. 
New Haven. 
New Haven. 
New Haven. 
New Haven. 
New Haven. 



J. S. Clark, H. 
H. A. Taylor, H. 
W. P. Knapp, Y. 
W. P. Knapp, Y. 
G. M. Brinley, T. 
P. S. Sears, H. 
P. S. Sears, H. 
R. P. Huntington, Jr 



J. S. Clark, 
H. A. Taylor, 
H. A. Taylor, 
P. E. Presbrey, 
W. P. Knapp, 
W. V. S. Thorne, 
W. P. Knapp, 
H. W. Shipman, 
W. P. Knapp, 
W. L. Thacher, 
jp. S. Sears, 
Q A. Shaw, Jr. 
iy. G. Hall, 
;0. S. Campbell, 
^ 10. S. Campbell, 
'^- A. E- Wright, 



KVKNTS AVON. 



BV " SINGLES. 

Harvard, ..... 4 

Yale, 3 

Columbia, o 

Trinity, i 



DOUBLES. 

3 
3 
2 
o 




(:3d.^^ <->4 ^^^..^-c^ 




CHAPTER VI. 

THE SECTIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS. 

Middle States — New England — Southern States — 
Western States — Long Island. 

I^HE decision of the sectional championships has 
been an interesting feature of each season's 
play. The idea originated in the year 1885, when 
the St. George's Cricket Club, of New York, ap- 
plied to the LTnited States National Lawn Tennis 
Association for the right to hold a tournament, 
under the auspices of the Association, for the cham- 
pionship of the Middle States. The requisite 
authority having been given, the first meeting was 
held on the grounds of the St. George's Cricket 
Club, at Hoboken, N. J., early in the month of 
June, 1885. It resulted in Mr. R. D. Sears being 
declared the champion of the Middle States. The 
following table is a complete record of the cham- 
pionships of this section. 



— 206 — 
MIDDLE STATES. 



CHAMPION. 



R. D. Sears. 
R . L. Beeckman. 
R. Iv. Beeckman. 
E. P. McMuUen. 
H. A. Taylor. 



WINNER OF 
TOURNAMENT. 



R. D. Sears. 
R. L. Beeckman. 
R. ly. Beeckman. 
E. P. McMullen. 
H. A. Taylor. 



DOUBLES CHAMPION'S. 



R. D. Sears & J. S. Clark. 

R.L. Beeckman &H.W.Slocum Jr. 



In the following year, 1886, the New Haven 
Lawn Club held a tournament, also under the aus- 
pices of the Association, for the championship of 
New England. The same club has since contin- 
ued to give this tournament, as an annual event. 



NEW ENGLANI>. 



18S6 



CHAMPION. 



H.W. Slocum, Jr. 



^VINNER OP 
TOURNAMENT. 



H. W. Slocum, Jr. 



H.W. Slocum, Jr. I H. W. Slocum, Jr. 
H.W. Slocum, Jr. e;. P. McMullen. 

H.W. Slocum, Jr. R.P. Huntington, Jr. 



DOUBLES CHAMPIONS. 



i H. W. Slocum, Jr. 
I W. L. Thacher. 

F. G. Beach & W. L. Thacher. 
V. G. Hall & O. S. Campbell 

i F. G. Beach, 

/ R. P. Huntington, Jr. 



The tournaments for the championship of the 
South have been played in various cities, including 
Wilmington, Baltimore and Washington. In 1887 
and the spring of 1888, the meetings in the South 
were not held under the auspices of the National 
Association, but the results are given in the follow- 
ing table, so that the record may not be incomplete. 



— 207 — 
SOUTHERN STATES. 



Spring \ 

i8S3 ( 



1889 



PLAYED AT 



Wilmington. 
Washington. 

Baltimore. 

Washington. 
Washington. 



SINGLES 
CHAMPION. 



C. B. Davis. 
Leigh Bonsai. 

A. H. S. Post. 

F. Mansfield. 
F. Mansfield. 



DOUBLES CH.A.MPIONS. 



C. B. Davis & R. H. E. Porter. 
L. Bonsai & I,. V. Lemoyne. 

L. Bonsai & h. V. Lemoyne. 

F. Mansfield & F. L.V.Hoppin. 
C. J. Post & M. F. Prosser. 



In 1887 the Chicago Tennis Club, of Chicago, 
111., held the first tournament for the championship 
of the West. Mr. C. A. Chase, of Chicago, is by- 
far the best player which the West has produced. 
He has held the title of champion from 1887 up to 
the present time. 

westi:rn states. 



CHAMPION. 



C. A. Chase. 
C. A. Chase. 
C. A. Chase. 



WINNER OF 
TOURNAMENT. 



C. A. Chase. 
E.B.McClellan. 
S. T. Chase. 



DOUBLES CHAMPIONS. 



F. B.McClellan & B.F. Cummins. 
E. B. McClellan & B.F.Cummins. 
C. A. Chase & S. T. Chase. 



The following is a record of the championships 
of Long Island, which have been decided annually 
upon the grounds of the Meadow Club of South- 
ampton. 



LONG ISLAND. 



1889 



CHAMPION. 



H. A. Taylor. 
H. A. Taylor. 
H. A. Taylor. 



Vl'INNER OF 
TOURNAMENT. 



H. A. Taylor. 
J. S. Clark. 
J. S. Clark.. 



DOUBLES CHAMPIONS. 



H. A. Taylor & H. W. Slocum, Jr. 
F. Keene & H. W. Slocum, Jr. 
F. Keene & H. A. Taylor. 



APPENDIX. 



LAWS OF LAWN TENNIS. 

As Adopted, Revised and Amended by the United States 

National Lawn Tennis Association, at Annual 

Conventions, i8Si-go. 



THE COURT. 

I. The Court is 78 feet long, and 27 feet wide. It is 
divided across the middle b}^ a net, the ends of which are 
attached to two posts, A and B, standing 3 feet outside of 



G 


I 
N 


3 




L 


E 


18 






21 




18 


21 




F 


3 


1 

3 


^ 




\ 
3 


9 


D 



H 



the court on either side. The height of the net is 3 feet 6 
inches at the posts, and 3 feet in the middle. At each end 
of the court, parallel with the net, and 39 feet from it, are 
drawn the base lines DE and FG-, the ends of which are 
connected by the side-lines DF and EGr. Half way be- 
tween side lines, and parallel with them, is drawn the half 
court line IH, dividing the space on each side of the net 
into two equal parts, the right and left courts. On each side 
of the net, at a distance of 21 feet from it, and parallel with 
it, are drawn the service lines KL and MN. 



— 309 — 

THE BALLS. 

2. The Balls shall measure not less than 2^1 inches, 
nor more than lyi inches in diameter ; and shall weigh not 
less than i \% oz. , nor more than 2 oz. 

THE GAME. 

3. The choice of sides, and the right to serve in the first 
game, shall be decided by toss ; provided that, if the winner 
of the toss choose the right to serve, the other player shall 
have choice of sides, and vice versa. If one player choose 
the court, the other may elect not to serve. 

4. The players shall stand on opposite sides of the net ; 
the player who first delivers the ball shall be called the 
server, and the other the striker-out. 

5. At the end of the first game the striker-out shall be- 
come server, and the server shall become striker-out ; and 
so on alternately in all the subsequent games of the set, or 
series of sets. 

6. The Server shall serve with one foot on the base 
line or perpendicularly above said line, and with the other 
foot behind said line, but not necessarily upon the ground. 
He shall deliver the service from the right to left courts, 
alternately, beginning from the right. 

7. The ball served must drop between the service line, 
half court line, and side line of the court, diagonally opposite 
to that from which it was served. 

8. It is a Fault in the server fail to strike the ball, or if 
the ball served drop in the net, or beyond the service line, or 
out of court, or in the wrong court ; or if the server do not 
stand as directed by law 6. 

9. A ball falling on a line is regarded as falling in the 
court bounded by that line. 

10. A fault cannot be taken. 

11. After a fault the server shall serve again from the 
same court from which he served that fault, unless it wa& a 
fault because he served from the wrong court. 



— 210 — 

12. A fault cannot be claimed after the next service is 
delivered. 

13. The server shall not serve till the striker-out is ready. 
If the latter attempt to return the service he shall be deemed 
ready. 

14. A service or fault delivered when the striker-out is not 
ready, counts for nothing. 

15. The service shall not be volleyed, i. e., taken, before 
it has touched the ground. 

16. A ball is in play on leaving the server's racket, except 
as provided for in law 8. 

17. It is a good return, although the ball touch the net ; 
hut a service, otherwise good, which couches the net, shall 
count for nothing. 

18. The server wins a stroke if the striker-out volley the 
■service, or if he fail to return the service or the ball in play ; 
or if he return the service or the ball in play so that it drops 
outside of his opponent's court ; or if he otherwise lose a 
stroke, as provided by law 20. 

19. The striker-out wins a stroke if the server serve two 
consecutive faults ; or if he fail to return the ball in play ; or 
if he return the ball in play so that it drops outside of his 
opponent's court ; or if he otherwise lose a stroke, as pro- 
vided by law 20. 

20. Either player loses a stroke if the ball touch him, 
or anything that he wears or carries, except his racquet in the 
act of striking ; or if he touch the ball with his racquet more 
than once ; or if he touch the net or any of its supports while 
the ball is in play ; or if he volley the ball before it has 
passed the net. 

21. In case any player is obstructed by any accident, the 
ball shall be considered a let. 

22. On either player vnnning his first stroke, the score is 
called 15 for that player ; on either player winning his 
second stroke, the score is called 30 for that player; on 
either player winning his third stroke, the stroke is called 40 
for that player ; and the fourth stroke won by either player 



— 311 — 

is scored game for that player, except as below: If both 
players have won three strokes, the score is called deuce ; 
and the net stroke won by either player is scored advantage 
for that player. If the same player wins the next stroke, he 
wins the gams ; if he loses the next stroke the score returns 
to deuce ; and so on until one player wins the two strokes 
immediately following the score of deuce, when game is 
scored for that player. 

23. The player who first wins six games, wins the set ; 
except as below : If both players win five games, the score is 
called games all; and the next game won by either player is 
scored advantage game for that player. If the same player 
wins the next game he wins the set ; if he loses the next 
game, the score returns to games all ; and so on, until either 
player wins the two games immediately following the score 
of games all, when he wins the set. But individual clubs, 
at their own tournaments, may modify this rule at their 
discretion. 

24. The playeis shall change sides at the end of every 
set ; but the umpire, on appeal from either player, before the 
toss for choice, shall direct the players to change sides at the 
end of the first, third, fifth and every alternate game succeed- 
ing thereafter in each set, if, in his opinion, either side have 
a distinct advantage, owing to the sun, wind, or any other 
accidental cause ; but if the appeal be made after the toss 
for choice, the umpire can only direct the players to change 
sides at the end of the first, third, fifth and every alternate 
game succeeding thereafter in the odd or deciding set. 

25. When a series of sets is played, the player who served 
in the last game of one set shall be striker-out in the first 
game of the next. 

26. In all contests the play shall be continuous from the 
first service till the match be concluded, but upon applica- 
tion by either player for reason or reasons which may seem 
adequate to the referee, an interval, which shall not exceed 
two minutes, may be allowed between successive rests. If 
the interval be between successive sets, seven minutes may 
be allowed. The referee at his discretion may at any time 



— 212 — 



postpone the match on account of rain or darkness, or 
may otherwise waive the provisions of this rule, on the 
expressed consent of both players. In any case of postpone- 
ment the previous score shall hold good. Where play has 
ceased for more than an hour, the player, who at the cessa- 
tion thereof was on the side of the net originally first chosen, 
shall have the choice of sides on the recommencement of 
play. He will stay on the side he chooses for the remainder 
of the set, and then alternate each subsequent set. 

The last two sentences of this rule do not apply when the 
players are changing every game. 

27. The above laws shall apply to the three-handed and 
four-handed games, except as below : — 

THE THREE-HANDED AND FOUR-HANDED 
GAMES. 

A 



K 



M 



B 



G 



28. For the three-handed and four-handed games the 
court shall be 36 feet in width ; 4.% feet inside the side lines, 
and parallel with them are drawn the service side lines KM 
and LiJf. The service lines are not drawn beyond the 
point at which they meet the service side lines, as shown in 
the diagram. 

29. In the three-handed game, the single player shall 
serve in every alternate game. 

30. In the four-handed game, the pair who have the 
right to serve in the first game shall decide which partner 



— 213 — 

shall do so; and the opposing pair shall decide in like 
manner for the second game. The partner of the player 
who served in the first game shall serve in the third, and the 
partner of the player who served in the second game shall 
serve in the fourth, and the same order shall be maintained 
in all the subsequent games of the set. 

31. At the beginning of the next set either partner of the 
pair which struck out in the last game of the last set may 
serve ; and the same privilege is given to their opponents in 
second game of the new set. 

32. The players shall take the service alternately through- 
out the game ; a player cannot receive a service delivered to 
his partner ; and the order of service and striking out once 
established shall not be altered, nor shall the striker-out 
change courts to receive the service, till the end of the set. 

33. If a player serve out of his turn, the umpire, as soon 
as the mistake is discovered by himself or one of the 
players, shall direct the player to serve who ought to have 
served. But all strokes scored and any faults served before 
such discovery, shall be reckoned. If a game shall be com- 
pleted before such discovery, then the service in the next 
alternate game shall be delivered by the partner of the 
player who served out of his turn, and so on in regular 
rotation. 

34. It is a fault if the ball served does not drop between 
the service-line, half-court line, and service side line of the 
court, diagonally opposite to that from which it was served. 

35. It is a fault if the ball served does not drop as provided 
in law 34, or if it touches the server's partner or anything he 
wears or carries. 

36. In matches, the decision of the umpire shall be final. 
Should there be two umpires, they shall divide the court 
between them, and the decision of each shall be final in his 
share of the court. 

ODDS. 

37. A Bisque is one point which can be taken by the 
receiver of the odds at any time in the set, except as follows : 



— 314 — 

{a. ) A bisque cannot be taken after a service is delivered, 
{b.) The server may not take a bisque after a fault, but 
tbe striker-out may do so. 

38. One or more bisques may be given to increase or 
diminish other odds. 

39. Half fifteen is one stroke given at the beginning of 
the second, fourth, and every subsequent alternate game of a 
set 

40. Fifteen is one stroke given at the beginning of every 
game of a set. 

41. Half thirty is one stroke given at the beginning of the 
first game, two strokes given at the beginning of the second 
game, and so on alternately in all the subsequent games of 
the set. 

42. Thirty is two strokes given at the beginning of 
every game of the set. 

43. Half forty is two strokes given at the beginning of the 
first game, three strokes given at the beginning of the 
second game, and so on alternately in all the subsequent 
games of the set. 

44. Forty is three strokes given at the beginning of every 
game of a set. 

45. Half Court : the players may agree into which half 
court, right or left, the giver of the odds shall play ; and the 
latter loses a stroke if the ball returned by him drops outside 
any of the lines which bound that half court. 

46. Owed odds are where the giver of the odds starts 
behind scratch. 

47. Owe half fifteen is one stroke owed at the beginning 
of the first, third, and every subsequent alternate game of a 
set. 

48. Owe fifteen is one stroke owed at the beginning of 
every game of a set. 

49. Owe half thirty is two strokes owed at the beginning 
of the first game, one stroke owed at the beginning of the 
second game, and so on alternately through all the subse- 
quent games of the set. 



— 315 — 

50. Owe thirty is two strokes owed at the beginning of 
every game of a set. 

51. Owe half forty is three strokes owed at the beginning 
of the first game, two strokes owed at the beginning of the 
second game, and so on alternately in all subsequent games 
of the set. 

52. Owe forty is three strokes owed at the beginning of 
every game of a set. 




OFFICERS AND MEMBERS 

OF THE 

United States 
National Lawn Tennis Association. 

(Aprii., 1890.) 



OFFICERS OF THE ASSOCIATION. 

PRESIDENT. 

JOSEPH S. CI^ARK, . . . Young- America Cricket Club 

139 South Fourth Street, Philadelphia, Pa. 

VICE-PRESIDENT. 

H. W. SLOCUM, Jr. . . . St. George's Cricket Club 

Garfield Building, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

SECRETARY. 

VALENTINE G. HALL, . Edgewood Lawn Tennis Club 

II West 37th Street, N. Y. City. 

TREASURER. 

HOWARD A. TAYLOR, . Country Club of Westchester County 

280 Broadway, N. Y. City. 

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. 

R. D. SEARS, JAMES DWIGHT, JOSEPH WHITTLESEY. 

E. H. OUTERBRIDGE, C. E. STICKNEY 



Members of the Association. 



CLASS I. 

Belmont Cricket Club — MiLTON C. WORK, Secretary, Girard 
Building, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Bergen Point Athletic Club— MRS. . A. C. Ste;vej^S, Secre- 
tary, 20I W. 103d St., New York City. 

Berkeley Athletic Club — J. Ci,ARKRead, Secretary, 19 W, 
44th St., New York City. 

Bridgeport Lawn Tennis Club — Frank Slason, Secretary, 
354 Main St., Bridgeport, Conn. 

Brooklyn Heights Tennis Club — F. J. Phili^ips, Secretary, 
98 Joralemon St., Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Brooklyn Hill Tennis Club — Remson Johnson, Secretary, 
168 Hancock St., Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Buffalo Tennis Club — E. P. CoTTi^E, Secretary', 424 Main 
St., Buffalo, N. Y. 

California Lawn Tennis Club — B. N. BEE, Secretary, 208 
California St. , San Francisco, Cal. 

Cheyenne Lawn Tennis Club — Lockwood Hebard, Secre- 
tary, Cheyenne, Wyoming. 

Chicago Tennis Club — E. M. SkinnER, Secretary, care of 
Marshall Field & Co. (Wholesale), Chicago, 111. 

Chestnut Hill Lawn Tennis Club — MiSS RuTH CoiT, Secre- 
tary, Chestnut Hill, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Clifton Tennis and Base Ball Club — MisS AnnaT. Ripley, 
Secretaiy, Rose Bank P. O., Staten Island. 

Columbia College L. T. Association — O. S. Campbell, Sec 
retary, 18 Remsen St., Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Colorado Springs Lawn Tennis Club — G. A. Macklin, Sec- 
retary, P. O. Box 44, Colorado Springs, Col. 

Country Club of Westchester Co. — E. HaighT, Secretary, 
26 Broad St., New York City. 



— 218 — 

Country Club of Maryland — F. P. MacLean, Secretary^ 

1519 Rhode Island Ave., Washington, D. C. 
Crescent Club of Mt. Vernon — H. M. Wigwams, Secretary, 

15 Cortlandt St., New York City. 
Danbury Lawn Tennis Club — GRANVil,l<:e WHITTLESEY, 

Secretary, Danbury, Conn. 
Dayton Lawn Tennis Club — T. B. Van Ansdai,, Secretary, 

23 South Main St., Da3rton, Ohio. 
Delaware Field Club — E. H. Gayi^ey, Secretary, 7th and 

Market Sts., Wilmington, Del. 
East Orange Lawn Tennis and Athletic Assciation — ROB- 
ERT Slimmon, Secretary, 12 College Place, New York 

City. 
Edgewood Club of Tivoli-on-Hudson — C. L- CivARKSQN, 

Secretary, 55 Liberty St., New York City. 
Elmwood Lawn Tennis Club — W. H. WiNG, Secretary, 10 

South Water St., Providence, R. I. 
Englewood Field Club — Edgar H Booth, Secretary, 11 

Wall St., N. Y. City. 
Flushing Athletic Club — HENRY K. Oilman, Secretary, 

Flushing, Long Island. 
Germantown Cricket Club — F. M. BiSSELL, Secretary, 24^ 

South Fourth St , Philadelphia, Pa. 
Harvard University L. T. Association — HUGH TallanT, 

Secretary, 9 Holyoke House, Cambridge, Mass. 
Hohokus Valley Tennis Club — STEPHEN W. Orne, Secre- 
tary, Ridgewood, N. J. 
Kenwood Lawn Tennis Club — Henry M. LanE, Secretary, 

286 48th St., Chicago, 111. 
Lenox Club — Hamilton Kuhn, Secretary, Lenox, Mass. 
Litchfield Lawn Club — F. S. WoodruFE, Secretary, 

Litchfield, Conn. 
Lone'wood Cricket Club — LoTT Mansfield, Secretary, 280 

Darmouth St., Boston, Mass. 
Luzerne Club— OGLE T. Warren, Secretary, 19 Second St., 

Troy, N. Y. 
Meat^ow Club of South Hampton — E. W. Humphreys, 

Secretary, 54 Exchange Place, New York City. 
Merion Cncket Club — Edward S. Sayres, Secretary, 217 

South Third St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
Minnesota Lawn Tennis Club— J. M. BlakeLEY, Secretary,. 

Gilfillan Block, St. Paul, Minn. 
Montclair Tennis Clut— Jamks S. Poeter, Secretary, 

Montclair, N. J. 



— 219 



Morristown Lawn Tennis Club— G11.BERT P. BULi-OCK^ 

Secretary', Morristown, N. J. 
Murray Hill Tennis Club— ly. WaXER Liman, Secretary, 

66 Leonard St., New York City. 
Narragansett Lawn Tennis Club— LLOYD SaltuS, Secre- 
tary, Narragansett Casino, R. I. 
New Haven Lawn Club— Dr. W. G. Daggett, Secretary, 

Cor. College and Crown Sts., New Haven, Conn. 
New Hamburgh Lawn Tennis Club— C. R. Sands, Secre- 

retary, 385 5th Ave., New York City. 
Newport Tennis Club— W. WaTTS Sherman, Secretary, 

Newport, R. I. 
New York Tennis Club— Clarence HobarT, Secretary, 

731 St. Nicholas Ave., New York City. 
New York Athletic Club— F. D. Sturgis, Secretary, 104 

West 55th St., New York City. 
North End Tennis Club— L. V. LeMoynE, Treasurer, 121 

La Salle St., Chicago, 111. 
North Shore Tennis Club— W. Y. WemplE, Secretary, New 

Brighton, Staten Island. 
Nutley Field Club— H. G. Proux, Secretary, 73 Broadway, 

New York City. 
Orange Lawn Tennis Club— S. M. Colgate, Secretary, 55 

John St., New York City. 
Orange Athletic Club— W. O. WiLEY, Secretary, 15 Halstead 

St., East Orange, N. J. 
Passaic Lawn Tennis Club— F. A. MarsELLUS, Secretary, 

Passaic, N. J. 
Philadelphia Cricket Club— Alan H. Harris, Secretary, 

116 South 3d St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
Pittsburg Cricket Club— CharlES S. ClARK, Secretary, 

Penn and Dallas Ave., Pittsburg, Pa. 
Portland Lawn Tennis Club-S. C. Fox, Secretary, 121 

Emery St., Portland, Maine. 
Ridgefield Athletic Club— William Bruce, Secretary, New 

York State National Bank, Albany, N. Y. 
Rochester Tennis Club— W. J. CuRTiS, Secretary, Union and 

Advertiser Co., Rochester, JST. Y. 
Rockaway Hunting Club-MiDDLETON S. BuRRiLL, Secre- 
tary, 21 Broad St., Mills Building, New York City. 
Scarsdale Lawn Tennis Club-C. C. Fi^EMiNG, Secretary, 

Second National Bank, 190 5th Ave., New York City. 
Seabright Lawn Tennis and Cricket Club-F. J. Allien, 
Secretary, i Broadway, New York City. 



— 220 — 

Springfield Tennis Ccmpa^y — H. G. Chapin, Secretary, 
Springfield, Mass. 

St, Augustine Tennis Club— G. S. Smith, Secretary, 536 
5tii Ave., New York City. 

Staten Island Cricket and Baseball Club — R. Sx. GEORGIA 
WaIvKER, Secretary, 53 Beaver St., New York City. 

Staten Island Ladies' Club — Mrs Geo. L Upshur, Secre- 
tary, New Brighton, Staten Island. 

St. George's Cricket C!ub— W. E. Gi,yn, Secretary, 30 
Broad St., New York City. 

Summit Lawn Tennis Club — W. Y. Hawks, Secretary, 
Summit, N. J. 

Taunton Tennis Association — Ai^bert Fui,i,ER, Secretary, 
Taunton, Mass. 

Tioga Athletic Association — Joseph T. Sii,i., Secretary, 329 
Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa. 

Trinity College Lawn Tennis Club — T. A. CONOVER, Secre- 
tary, Trinity College, Hartford, Conn. 

Twenty-third Regiment Tennis Club— J. W. Raymond, 
Secretary, 7 Wall St., New York City. 

Tuxedo Club — WiLWAM KenX, Secretary, 59 Liberty St., 
New York City. 

WatTbury Lawn Tennis Club — C. B. MuNGER, Secretary, 
Waterbury, Conn. 

Wedgmere Tennis Club — C. H. Tyi<ER, Secretary, Win- 
chester, Mass. 

West End ^ awn Tennis Club — Henry C. Snow, Presi- 
dent, 27 Newberry St., Boston, Mass. 

Yale University Lawn Tennis Association — C. P. Howi<ANDi 
Secretary, i56 Farnam St., New Haven, Conn. 

Young America Cricket Club — I. R. Davis, Secretary, 257 
South Fourth St., Philadelphia, Pa. 

CLASS II. 

Hudsr.n R'vfr Lawn Tennis Association — Dr. W. G. Mur- 
DOCK, Secretary, Cold Springs-on-the-Hudson, N. Y. 



221 



ALL ENGLAND CHAMPIONSHIPS. 



SINGLES. 



YEAR. 


CHAMPION. 


ALL-COMERS, 
WINNER. 


RUNNER-UP. 


1877 


S. W. Gore. 


S. W. Gore. 


W. Marshall. 


1878 


P. F. Hadow. 


P. F. Hadow. 


W. Erskine. 


1879 


J. T. Hartley. 


J. T. Hartle . 


V. St. Ledger. 


1880 


J. T. Hartley. 


H. F. Lawford. 


0. E. Woodhouse. 


1881 


W. Renshaw. 


W. Renshaw. 


R. T. Richardson. 


1882 


W. Renshaw. 


E. Renshaw. 


R. T. Richardson. 


,1883 


W. Renshaw. 


E. Renshaw. 


Donald Stewart. 


1884 


W. Renshaw. 


H. F. Lawford. 


C. W. Grinstead. 


1885 


W. Renshaw. 


H. F. Lawford. 


E. Renshaw. 


1886 


W. Renshaw. 


H. F. Lawford. 


E. W. Lewis. 


1887 


H. F. Ivawford. 


H. F. Lawford. 


E. Renshaw. 


1888 


F. Renshaw. 


F. Renshaw. 


E. W. Lewis. 


1889 


W. Renshaw. 


W. Renshaw. 


H. S. Barlow. 



DOUBLES. 



879 



88 7 



CHAMPIONS. 



L. K. Erskine & H. F. Lawford. 
W. Renshaw & E. Renshaw. 
W. Renshaw & E. Renshaw. 
J. T. Hartley & R. T. Richardson. 
C. W. Grinstead & C. E. Welldon. 
W. Renshaw & E. Renshaw. 
W. Renshaw & E. Renshaw. 
W. Renshaw & E. Renshaw. 
Hon. P. B.Lyon &H.W.Wilberforce 
W. Renshaw & E. Renshaw. 
W. Renshaw & E. Renshaw. 



RUNNERS-UP. 



F. Durant & G. E. Tabor. 

O. E. Woodhouse & C. J. Cole. 

W. J. Down & H. Vaughan. 

J. G. Horn & C. B. Russell. 

C. B. Russell & R. T. Milford. 

E. L. Williams & E. W. Lewis. 

A. J. Stanley & C. E. Farrer. 

A. J. Stanley & C. E. Farrer. 

J. H. Crispe & E. Barratt-Smith. 

E. G. Meers & A. G. Ziffo. 

E. W. Lewis & G. W. Hillyard. 



RULES FOR HANDICAPPING. 



o ij a 

^ a a 
c^ a 



£ O a) -3 

^j '^ V 

"^ O (U al 

25- « 
S f^iH 

* g«)9 

« S g „ , 

- a5 o 
'S o 2 

1-^ u ^ 
CJ -5 ^ 
>>^ ■• 

■p.* ^- 
■S fl-^5 

,Si <" «^ 






O ti jj fi 

•«« i; cs 0) 
aoH ° 

J3 (Jl O o 

Sa^-S 
>.S^a 

fe .. be?, 



5 '§''3 



-5S, 



r w tc a 





% 





-d . 


■0 . 


"0 ,„ 


^ 


^2 


"2 




CO 


'0 ^ 


•0 . 


lO j^ 


"^tn 






10 ^ 




"3 


a w 


a m 


a. 2 


ii'^ 

CO ISJ (N 






c 

"3 


a. 2 


G.2 


c2 


c2 


3 




w 


W 


M 


n" 


M 
CO 


Sod 


Wd<j 


Wcy 


W 


inN 


IOm 

M 


Wca 


W^ 


« 




13 ,/ 


•d . 


TS . 






a.2 


^2 


a 


13 . 


-a . 


I-.2' 


H.2 








^§2 


a <n 

^2 


a 2 


^ 



CO 


Oj 0) 


^3 

Oi M 


"3 


C82 


g to 

rt2 


" 1 Ol <N 


c2 

01 H 


3 


ft 






g>- 


H 






^(^ 


w^ 


ft 


1?" 


iOm 


Iw^ 


Koy 


« 






'^ X 






^W 1 ^.CT 


^ 


_ 

CO tS . 


'^,.- 


|!?« 


H 










CO a. 2 

r-l "i^ 


a 


g, 


C-^ I^*J2 'C^ 


<A a. 2 
"3 "=-Q 




•0 ia2 

" 0! cs 


<4H 

"3 


05 

2 


CO 
iH 






a" 




Wcaiw=%i|Wca 




iOm 


W=8 


W 


f) 










„j 


,„• 


a.2 


^ 


a 


13 . 13 . 


".2 


•0 










(M 


C.2 


^2 


^•0 


•^\ 


jA 


fl.2 C.2 ,r. 


ia-o 


i 1 


(M 






iH ^ 


£8 N 


ni N 


(S w 


"3 


"3 




C« H 


ca ^ 


1— 1 








Wt^ 


W^ 


Woa 


w 


W 


m" h" 


w=a 


W « 














to 

"3 


13 . 

C.2 
=a2 


'2 • 


10 ~'^ 


"2 

C.2 


"3 


3 


i-i 
1— 1 








W^jKca 


Wca 


W 


IOct 


UO H 


ffioy K^a 


ffi 


N 








,„■ 


1 - 




to (_■ 


IT) • 10 












ro2 


ro ro 


■a . "u . 






M ai H 










'•^•^ 


C <4H 


a ui a.2 


10 


^2 


<«2 ■" 


.2 









rH "5 1-1 


tS rt 


M 


rt c-i 


"3 " "3 


^ 


1— 1 






p:=a 


ffi ffi 


*"« "^i-i 




ffic^ Kc3| HI 


M 











X) . 


-O -I'd . 




""2' 


"2 


m 












^ 


a tn 

«2 


a .2 a w 


;? 


^2 


CTj H 


Cm 
"3 


2 


OS 






X 


10 c,! 


M 1 M 




iii=a 


Kdjj 


K 


1-1 








\_, 1 1 1 LD -• 1 IT) _■ 












•a . h3 . 








'"' -tH 












00 co^ uj^ 


10 


in 


ii2 


13 '-' 


"3 


oi 

2 


00 






lO„ lO„ 






Key 


i^ 


X 










'0 . 




"2 


"2 "2 














n.2 




c2 


c2 ^3 

c3 H cd " 


3 


2 


i> 






LOm 




ffi^ 


ffica Kc^ 


" 


M 










"i2!".2l M 1 ■ 












CO « 




•A .2 
■3 ^ 


.2 


CD 






uO • 


10 ^- 1 10 




, 






















v*3 
"5 -5^ 


^3 3 


3 


3 


in 






Wc^i 


Xe^ X 


(N 


M 








"^05 "^ ' 


























.2 


3 


>* 






ECca K 


N 


" 








un 


















2 


CO 






ffi 


(M 


M 








05 


m 








(M 2 


2 <M 






N 


" 






tn- 










r-l :o 


r-t 






*^ 


.^ 


. 



























223 - 



m 




o a ifi , o m 1 itoivocniiow 


\nxn 






CO" 




W;0 




£.2 
10 j^ 


"5 


Ci2;c2 


§1 


V 










10 tfl 1 lo tn 1 lo m 




V 


iH 
iH 




t2 


II 


"3 


1^2 1^2 ^2 


iH 














intn 1 inol 






ha 

n 




O 






^ 


•^ in 






W.0 













in 


1003 


uo'j] mm 








>. 




to CO - I tO-;5 u. • 

C* t^-Q C*^ ,o.2 






^^ 


t^'^ tSio 








p. 


OS 




< 


cd 




ffi| x^ 


0) 






5 & 








in 


lO 


lotfi 10 tr: 










^ 




^2 'tS^S ,^ 


,0 oi 


(A 


Vh 


1^2 3.'^ 








m 


00 


w|'w| 


t,2 


C3 






00 






SjS 
















^^ 




^•2| .n 




■2 ' 


c2 kSS 








o a; 
7iO 


I> 




" 1 


cd 




I> 








1 ! "^ 


ir;tn 1 loto 










11 


CO 


t? "SSI'S 2 

If? H t?^ 




t22 




CO 












m 


loui 1 lO m 
























^ 5i 




,0 m 


,o.S 




c2L2 _ 








U3 


l!?w 




X 








° 2 

■s-s 






lOUl 


intn 










fl^ 


."^ 


C^ 










'^ 


"3 " 


13 " 


'* 






CI j3 




"" ffi 


X^ 


K^ 










CO 




^>2 


P 


« 








ft-S 




lotn i/5ai 










II 




tSS ui^ 








(N 


5^ S" 


04 








inxn 






S"^ 




<S2 






"5. 


rH 


5" '^ 























— 224— 

THE BAGN ALL- WILD SYSTEM OF DRAWING.* 

The object of this method of drawing is to eliminate 
all the byes in the first round, both for convenience and 
still more because a bye is of less value in the first round 
than later in the tournament. 

If the number of entries is a power of 2, e. g., 4, 8, 16, 32, 
or 64, there need be no byes. In other cases a preliminary 
round must be played, in which there shall be as many 
matches as the number of entries exceeds the power of 2 
next below, all the other contestants having byes. 

For example, suppose that there are 37 entries. The power 
of 2 next below is 32, therefore there must be 5 matches and 
27 byes. 

In this way the five losers go out and the number of con- 
testants is reduced to 32, which will always divide by 2 (16, 
8, 4, 2, I). 

The names should be written on slips of paper and the 
slips carefully folded and put in a hat. They are then drawn 
one by one and written one below the other, the pairs that 
are to play together being bracketed. One-half the byes 
should come first, next the matches, last the remaining byes. 
Should there be an uneven number of byes, the odd one goes 
at the bottom. One example will suffice. There are 19 
entries ; three matches must be played to reduce th e num- 
ber to 16 ; that will leave 13 byes, 6 at the top of the list and 
7 at the bottom, as follows : 

SECOND ROUND. 

A 
D 

F 



A 




A 


B 




B 


C 
D 


Byes. 


C 
D 


E 




n 


F 


F 


G 


1 


G 


H 


f 




I 
J 


( 


I 


K 
I. 


} 


Iv 


M 


1 


M 


N 




N 










P 


Byes. 


P 


Q 


Q 


R 


R 


S 


, 


S 



G J 



O J 



I 



P J 



P takes first prize ; G second ; D and O equal thirds, 

- JAMES DWIGHT. 

* Reprinted by permission from Wright & Ditson, of Boston, Mass 



3477-^ 



